Flying Blind (Sarah Hoyt nails the United Airlines affair)

According to Hoyt ^ | 12 April 2017 | Sarah Hoyt

[a fool in paradise]

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.

[a fool in paradise]

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.

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.

[Gay State Conservative]

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.

[Chgogal]

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.

[Chgogal]

Well sweetie, we are going to find out. I wonder why UAL paid off all the passenger on the flight, sweetie?

[jiggyboy]

“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/

[lepton]

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.

[ml/nj]

"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

[HalfIrish]

The article has about a thousand words about PR and virtually none about legalities. So where did your caustic, demeaning comment come from, sweetie?

[lepton]

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.

[cyclotic]

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...

[moovova]

Being right and legal worked out well for United, didn’t it?

[LuvFreeRepublic]

I am getting the impression that flying is now becoming a right, and all terms and conditions will be defined by the masses. Easier solution is to make informed choices, up to and including choosing not to flying. Talk about beating a dead horse 🐴

[from occupied ga]

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.

[pepsionice]

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.

[PAR35]

I quit reading at the ‘f’ word. I think I’ll hit the abuse button.

[Tench_Coxe]

Amen....

[Agamemnon]

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!

[Chainmail]

"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?