Flying Blind (Sarah Hoyt nails the United Airlines affair)

One of the recurring themes of this blog is “how companies, particularly those used to having control over their customers adapt/not to the new world of communications, the new world of technology that empowers the individual.”

My name is Sarah A. Hoyt, and I fly. I don’t fly often — anymore — and I don’t fly with much degree of enjoyment because I was always rather afraid of flying. (Afraid is not the right term. I hate not being in control.)

But there was a time I flew more and with greater enjoyment. This was around 99 to 2000 when for various reasons, we and the boys flew (tourism, mostly) about six times a year, return trips. (So, twelve times a year.)

I don’t know if you remember those days? You checked your luggage in, the planes were on time more often than not. If not on time, they tried to compensate and be nice to you.

Unfortunately 9/11 changed that. But I think the change was deeper than we think. It wasn’t just that the airlines, suddenly faced with multiple delays and fewer passengers took the exactly wrong tactic to make themselves profitable again: charge for ALL the things, make the seats so small that when someone reclines, they’re in the lap of the people behind, etc. No. It was that this change was aided, abetted, directed by an authoritarian type of mentality.

I can’t prove it, but I think part of it was all the bail outs from government to the airlines. The other part was that well… the entire flying experience became more authoritarian. You have to submit to being checked from head to toe to even get aboard (and yet, as usual, I flew with both liquids and blades I didn’t know I was carrying last week. It’s kabuki.)

Along with this came the airlines ability to remove/accuse of interference or threats or terrorism anyone who argues too loudly with any of its employees. We’ve all heard stories of people removed/locked up/etc simply because they wouldn’t or couldn’t obey instructions.

I remember the woman handcuffed to the airport bench who died through lack of meds, the same lack that was causing her to act psychotic.

I think the ability to get away with mistreating passengers (and call the police on passengers if they complain) and getting away with some egregious abuses that people tolerate because “well, who knows, next time it could be a threat” has corrupted airline culture.

I think what happened to the United Passenger was not only predictable, but inevitable. Once airlines get used to the idea that you’re “cattle” to be herded and told what to do, arbitrarily, and that if you refuse to pay for extras you’re negligible, you have set up the conditions in which a passenger, sooner or later will get abused and the abuse will get filmed.

As with publishing, we have an industry that has a monopoly and is told by the government it is “vital” and given subsidies to prove it. (Well, publishing hasn’t been, I think, but you get the point.)

Because the employees have full authority and can back it up by accusing their passengers of terrorism/denying them boarding/creating trouble, they’ve got into this mentality where the passenger is NOT their customer, but simply widgets to be moved around, ordered about and treated, generally, like things of no account.

Which explains why our airline travel is rapidly coming to mimic the qualities of Soviet travel in its hey day.

I rarely fly these days. In the last 9 years, we’ve retrenched our financial position so often we’re now out of trenchers. Also, frankly, I hate flying these days. You have to get there an hour and a half ahead of time, and half the time the flight will be changed/delayed/strange. The strange part usually involves distributing my family around the airplane like a kid’s thrown marbles, seemingly for fun. (Like last week, when Dan and I were separated and another couple were equally separated for no reason either of us could figure out. — we traded.) This is a problem for me, because I have severe mid-range deafness. Yes, at a noisy con, if I smile and nod when you tell me that you just grilled your neighbor with garlic, it’s because I have no idea what you said. So, in a noisy plane? I have no idea what the attendants are telling me at any given time. I have no idea what the announcements are. Usually I look at Dan/Robert/Marshall and they translate. And yes, there have been one or two situations in which flight attendants thought I was being obtuse on purpose, but fortunately not escalating to violence, as I rarely travel alone.

So, it’s not a pleasurable experience. The reasons I do it these days are to attend cons; to accompany Dan on a business trip; to see our aging/ailing relatives (yes, we know eventually we’ll arrive too late. We’re too far away. But we try.

And every time I travel, the flight is overbooked and they ask for volunteers. Sometimes I’m really tempted, because, say, a voucher for 1k would pay a trip to see my parents. BUT what good does it do me to arrive, say, at Liberty con on Sunday, then turn around and come back.

I swear until yesterday I did not know you could get INVOLUNTARILY bumped, and the idea fills me with dread. The reasons I travel, I’ll still have to travel, but it has the potential of nullifying the entire reason I am even there.

For now, everyone who is reporting on the UAL incident is saying the “doctor involved” has a shady past. This is TO AN EXTENT TRUE. Kind of. He had some problems, some of them apparently resulting from PTSD (his treatment at the hands of the airline must REALLY have helped that) that led him into shady behavior AFTER which he did everything in his power to clean up his act.

The interesting thing here is where the Louisville newspaper reporting on him found his name to do the background check. It wasn’t in early reports, and it was only in possession of the airline.

Did the airline give the name to the newspaper? I don’t know. I wish I could say it was unthinkable.

However, the behavior of various people coming out at the same time to defend United and to tarnish in any way the reputation of the man they were caught abusing, reminded me of the incident when I posted Frontiers of Insanity post.

This was a time when my blog got on a good day about 100 hits, but within hours of my putting up a post critical of Frontier, we had a bonafide Frontier apologist, casting aspersions on my character and acting like I was crazy and “entitled.” (BTW if you want a glimpse into how crazy and authoritarian airlines have got, that experience is a good example. And it’s not even the worst we’ve had. The absolute worst was 9? years ago when flying back from Chattanooga took us on a tour of the US, including overnight in Chicago and bringing us home too late to go through the mandatory parent interview to get #2 son into a dual college/high school program. Fortunately Older Son ably filled in for us, and we just had to go in and sign papers after.)

This same comment about being “entitled” was left by a United Employee on a post of mine on FB yesterday. He said I didn’t understand the trouble with trying to subdue a planeful of entitled and unruly people.

I don’t like the term “entitled.” It is too often used by people who think they have authority over you to tell you to fall in place. Yes, I know, you do get “entitled” people, who demand safe spaces and think life should be “fair” like an eternal kindergarten. But there are better terms for them, like “infantile” and “full of hubris.”

In the context of the airline, let’s dissect “entitled.” You’re d*mn right I’m entitled. When you pay for a service, you are entitled to that service. It is known as “contract”. And I don’t really care if the government says it’s legal for them to drop people involuntarily. The government is no arbiter of morals. The truth is that in any other industry, if I pay for something I’m ENTITLED to it. And if people revoke it after payment, it’s called fraud and there are all kinds of ugly consequences.

Just because the government thinks airlines are “essential” and enables ugly behavior, it doesn’t make it RIGHT.

Entitled? Damn right I’m entitled. When I pay for something, I bought it, and it’s mine, whether it’s a service or a physical thing. This is known as property rights, and — as such — is the cornerstone of the civilized society we used to be.

Again, I didn’t know until this week that airlines could just refuse boarding at will. I still need to fly, but the idea that it can be arbitrarily denied because of someone else’s priority or someone else’s **** up does not make me love it more. I always assumed they just offered more and more money until SOMEONE took it.

Yeah, yeah, I know “overbooking is why flights are so cheap.” Is it? Is it really? I don’t know what the rate of missing/not being there for flights is. I’ve missed ONE flight in my entire life. It would seem to me that having passengers on standby would take care of that. SURELY if you’re actually compensating people for giving up their seats — and playing fair with compensation. I’ve heard rumors United Airlines vouchers are useless — it costs you more than one or two empty seats.

The only time another … ah… company denied me the right to a service I paid for, it was the post office, who told me I couldn’t have the mailbox where the previous owners had had it, under the porch, but must have it down seventeen steps, at street level, because their UNION didn’t want them to have to climb that many steps.

In both cases, both institutions were heavily subsidized and protected by government. In both cases, service is/was lousy. In both cases the person being served wasn’t viewed as the CUSTOMER or the person who actually kept them in business.

I fully expect airlines to say that passengers must “build in” days to their travel, to insure they get there in time. I mean, the post office told me — when I pointed out having the box on the street, in a street with pedestrian traffic was asking for theft — that I should have anything important and certainly not checks sent to me. (Which explains why they’re increasingly Spam Mail.)

What I say is that if I need to build in hotels for an extra night at each end, then their flights must be WAY cheaper.

In the end this is the problem with the game of authoritanism and subtraction of services the airlines play. Sooner or later, you’ve subtracted everything, and frankly Greyhound starts sounding good.

And then, perhaps, government decides you’re not essential anymore and stops subsidizing you. Or you have to learn to subsist on package-carrying only. OR — and it’s already happening — an airline that actually believes their customers are their customers and deserve to be treated as human beings comes into being and sends you into bankruptcy.

What I know is that right now, where we are, United COMPLETELY misunderstands their position. From their half-hearted excuses, to the letter their CEO sent to employees telling them they had done nothing wrong and the passenger was a poopy head, they completely fail to understand that the public in whose court of opinion they’re being tried are those same widgets they’ve been pushing around and mistreating for YEARS.

Frankly, just in terms of how closely packed together we were last week, I have enough of a hate-in for them to last me for years.

United has been very close to my “no, not even if it’s half the price” list. Now they’re firmly on it. I’m sure I’m not alone.

And that in the end is what happens when you forget who actually PAYS you and who you’re SUPPOSED to serve. At some point, you subtract enough — like, assuring them you’ll actually transport them for money — that you find you no longer have customers.

It’s a great way to go out of business. And all for lack of understanding that they’re selling SOMETHING and not in charge of ordering people around to suit the airline’s convenience.

NO ONE is entitled to your business. NO ONE is entitled to play bait and switch with you. And companies who think they are and can will eventually be “rewarded” with disappearance. It might take some time, but it’s inevitable.

The way to stay in business is to offer what your customers want and to be nice to them while providing it.

You have to submit to being checked from head to toe to even get aboard (and yet, as usual, I flew with both liquids and blades I didn’t know I was carrying last week. It’s kabuki.)

Are the airlines still providing knives with meals in first class? Because that is where the 9-11 hijackers were seated.

The stewardess union fought for smaller carry-on bags and limiting the number of carry-ons. They thought it was taking people too long to deplane and a general nuisance.

The way to stay in business is to offer what your customers want and to be nice to them while providing it.

OK,sweetie....tell me this.Which laws,if any,did United or any of the security/police personnel involved in that incident break?

We're talking legality here,not PR.

This is why I have not flown since 2013, although that round trip was very nice, It was a Canadian airline with lovely personal and great seats. I'd fly them again in a heartbeat but I don't have family in Canada.

I'm stuck with UAL, Spirit or American, so no flying.

“Did United Airlines Violate Its Own Contract By Forcing That Passenger Off The Plane?”

“A review of United’s “Contract of Carriage” suggests that the airline carrier violated its own rules when it forcibly removed a passenger to make room for United employees.”

http://thefederalist.com/2017/04/11/did-united-airlines-violate-its-own-contract-by-forcing-that-passenger-off-the-plane/

And that’s a big part of the thing. No one can deny that this was a PR botch of epic proportions - and there are enforcements of rules on bumping or cancellations that cause me to not fly certain airlines, or to build the possibility of being bumped into my itinerary (it’s not a particularly rare event that *someone* is bumped, usually not just a particular person).

The guy had every right to be upset about being bumped - even extremely so - but once he was told to leave, he had to leave. Instead, he chose to make it a physical altercation with Security and not walk off the plane like a human.

"In the context of the airline, let’s dissect “entitled.” You’re d*mn right I’m entitled. When you pay for a service, you are entitled to that service. It is known as “contract”. And I don’t really care if the government says it’s legal for them to drop people involuntarily. The government is no arbiter of morals. The truth is that in any other industry, if I pay for something I’m ENTITLED to it. And if people revoke it after payment, it’s called fraud and there are all kinds of ugly consequences."

Bears repeating, loud and clear.

ML/NJ

The non-lawyer who wrote that skipped over several lines in the contract that leave various parts of his argument in shambles...like section 1s “The request for volunteers and the selection of such person to be denied space will be in a manner determined solely by UA.”

For the remainder, it is legalistic argument without reference to whether terms have been defined the way he does.

Hopefully this incident will be a catalyst of change for the airlines who have gotten too used to treating paying customers as widgets.

I fly Southwest 6-8 times a year. I don’t really like them, but they are better than all the rest.

About 20 years ago, I remember hearing a radio financial guy say that he would handle an overbooking by stepping on the plane with a wad of cash.

Folks, I need to get to the destination and I’m willing to personally pay the first person to give me their seat $500 in cash. OK, $600 and keep going.

If the airline did that, a ticket on the next available flight at any airline, hotel if needed and a few hundred dollars, many people would take that offer.

However, the meager offers they give of a heavily limited ticket is a pathetic option and not worth considering.

Personally I only fly for business. I’ve only flown once for a pleasure trip and once to go see my dad before he died. A free ticket is meaningless to me. Money on the other hand...

I happened to catch a few comments from a UAP pilot on the Limbaugh show a couple of days ago. His words were "It's a privilege to fly..." and then went on to "justify" any sort of treatment of the passengers by airline employees.

What a complete ass. He has it exactly backwards It's a "privilege" for UAL or any company for that matter to get our business as consumers. And once you have our business you'd better keep earning it EVERY SINGLE TIME WE USE YOUR SERVICES.

My understanding was that UAL topped out their offer at $1000. That's peanuts compared to the potential actual cost that you can incurr for a lost day. First last minute hotel accommodations in a big city like Chicago will eat up half of it right there. Second if you have a business you may or may not need to get back to meet obligations which could cost you a lot more than whatever is left over after you pay for an additional day's food and lodging.

They should have upped the ante to bribe passengers off with a really attractive offer. Personally I hope I never fly with the a..hole pilot that called into Limbaugh's show. If his attitude is typical for UAL employees I hope I never have to fly UAL again.

I think the catch to this whole game is the 30 minute window prior to boarding. If there’s overbooking, or a need to put crew members in seats...then BEFORE a single person is allowed to walk down the ramp, there needs to be some offer put out there.

I agree....some later flight...some compensation (say $100 to start off). If no interest in two minutes, then offer up a $300 voucher. Then move onto a Marriot hotel deal for the night and a max of $400 cash. After that...just punch the button and pick folks at random (well before they board).

If you screw up and everyone has boarded, and then you try to ‘herd the cows’....it just won’t work. Just on the baggage issue alone (you’d have to remove bags from the cargo area). I personally hate seeing Senators regulate this but the airlines need to get their act together and just agree...30 minutes prior to boarding, you start the over-booking game.

I have happily flown United all over the world and have been part of their frequent flyer program for over 20 years. This woman's opinion comes with her first admission that she doesn't fly much, she's 1/2 deaf (airlines accommodate those with disabilities - and on that basis she could probably board before me) and she doesn't take the time to plan her travel to assure her that she gets the seating she desires for herself and her family.

I had a flight cancelled on me due to violent weather on the EastCoast just last week while I was sitting at the airport. I called United and as a frequent flyer they had already seen to it to make my alternative first available flight arrangement the next day. Did I complain? Of course not, how could I reasonably do so? Did United do right by me? Of course, they did.

No one excuses how this matter was handled in Chicago last week, but of the 4 who were required to give up their seats (as the law currently allows United to do for any reason they see fit) only this one guy mugging for the camera and making great theater of it decided to make a federal case out of it.

This woman should whine less, plan better, and avail herself of accommodations made routinely for those with disabilities (or is she too proud to do so?)

FReegards!

"We're talking legality here,not PR."

Ok, let's talk legality - since when is assault legal? Where in the contract of purchasing an airline ticket does it say that "violence may be employed on customers at will"?

At the heart of this matter is whether service providers can not only deny service but can physically harm individuals who are not committing any violent act or threat, for the sole purpose of maximizing profit.

What do you think, Sweetie?

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.