Hmmmm. Let's guess which side of the discussion you're on.
United Airlines Video
- Thread starter Fijimn
- Start date
Looks like he wasn't the pill for sex doctor either. Sigh...And a slander per se claim arises.
who'da thunk this would be the topic that would bring some life back to the LR?
If you do away with overbooking, then every reservation will become nonrefundable. You reserve a seat you better use it. The reason they overbook is because people make reservations and then never show up.
It seems United may have violated their contract. Most of the language in the contract with regards to an oversold flight is in regards to preventing people from boarding. I havent read the whole contract personally, but that seems to be the take away from a couple articles I have read. This passenger was already boarded, so any reasons in regards to preventing him from boarding, which an oversold flight is one, shouldnt apply.
And your analogy is off a bit. If you want someone to leave your private home that is one thing, but if you ask a paying customer to leave your business so someone else can take their spot, then it should probably be for a good reason, or you should probably be expected to catch some hell for it.
Delta offering up to $10k for overbooked flights.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/14/news/companies/delta-10000-overbooked-flight/index.html
Will come back to bite them...
http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/14/news/companies/delta-10000-overbooked-flight/index.html
Will come back to bite them...
So I suppose EVERY single person on EVERY news channel is wrong and you are correct...ok
Never said it was good business. It's obviously not a good practice.
As far as the airlines,I actually think that the airlines having the right to do that is total bs. If they are permitted to overbook then they should have to pay how much ever it takes until someone voluntarily wants to get off.
My whole argument is what are law enforcement personnel suppose to do with someone that won't willingly leave. When someone chooses to not listen to cops, they are going to get banged around
But there is a question and issue before the law enforcement comes into play, which is why, was a passenger who was already boarded, being kicked off? Law enforcement was out of line though, and I cant possibly see how they acted in the right. THis guy broke no laws and was doing what he paid to do. Plus, this was a 70 year old guy, they could have pulled him off without beating the hell out of him. Nobody can look at that guy and think that a couple of young in shape guys couldnt get him off in a mostly non violent manner. But again, why is a paying customer breaking no laws, subjected to law enforcement anyway? Because United failed, that is why.
ANd being "permitted to overbook" isnt an excuse. A business owes an obligation to paying customers. I understand things happen, especially in that industry. THere will be delays, everything wont be perfect at all times, I get it. But being "permitted" to do something, doesnt mean you should.
Last edited:
It isnt every person on every news channel. I read 3 article tonight saying United violated their own carriage contract. Probably going to be something settled in the courts, but it is a pretty big presumption that United acted within their contract.
ANd in saying that, I did read a bit of their contract. And more than once, they say ,
- United’s rights to change terms of the Contract of Carriage.
Yeah, now you are making stuff up or the news in Ohio is idiotic, which I would understand considering that OSU is the state's flagship university.
1) It wasn't local news and I'm yet to see an "expert" state they weren't in legal rights to have the guy removed.
2)As much as I dislike OSU, that statement is ignorant.
Really?
https://www.inc.com/cynthia-than/th...-was-not-overbooked-and-why-that-matters.html
https://www.google.com/amp/www.newsweek.com/why-united-were-legally-wrong-deplane-dr-dao-583535?amp=1
https://www.google.com/amp/www.phil...right-is-wrong-for-passengers-.html?amphtml=y
That's a tiny smidgeon.
For the TLDR sort, they all say the same thing basically, if it had been overbooked then they could bump him prior to boarding. But it wasn't overbooked and he was already boarded. The only ways for United to have lawfully removed him was if he was a threat (they can kick you off if you've got a weapon or have a contagious disease) or creating a disturbance none of which happened.
Last edited:
You forgot they offered you and everyone else in the full restaurant $800 and no one accepted it. And were going to give you that and you still refused and told them they were going to have to drag you out and was on the phone with someone saying you were going to sue the establishment.
So Delta upped the amount the gate agent and their supervisors can pay for bumping passengers. Nice move.
American said no one can be bumped after the flight is boarded.
American said no one can be bumped after the flight is boarded.
I agree. And also agree it should be determined before they let people board.
Those who are pro united you still haven't answered my question. At point will be for you on the removal of a passenger will be too much for you? When is the removal excessive. I keep hearing the airline is within their rights but can they kill a person? Break a leg? What say you? What happens if in this violent removal another passenger is injured?
I look at it like this LE asked you to leave; right or wrong I don't know. However if you don't comply eventually they will have to remove you. If you resist then injuries that may happen are partly on you. Other people were asked to leave, they did and had no injuries. Now if they wrong in asking him to leave; then you take that up in court or through some other means. If they find United was at fault and did something illegal; then fine compensate the guy for whatever medical costs, lost wages and say 100k for his troubles. What I think is just idiotic is that the dude will get millions and maybe 10's of millions. Even if United was completely wrong he had some say in how it turned out. Every video I saw makes it real hard to believe he had a broken nose, concussion and lost teeth; maybe the cops put a beating on him without the camera phones around. Another thing that is already happening is people are coming out of everywhere about how United "treated" them poorly. Maybe some of these complaints are valid; but I would also bet there are multiple law firms just salivating waiting to get their piece of the pie.
To add to Ranger's response, what degree of culpability do you place on the passenger? In this case, he had full control of the outcome in the beginning.
My guess is that his lawyer is going to say that in the very beginning, it was United Airlines who had full control of the situation.......... before they let the passengers board the flight and sit in their assigned seats for which they had been charged.
Thinking that the passenger could have prevented this from happening is not necessarily Pro United. There is middle ground. Is there not? This isn't either pro passenger or pro united. I think the people you are labeling pro United also think United could and should have handled the situation better. But so could have the passenger as Ranger explained and 3 other passengers that were bumped did not get dragged off or suffer any physical damage.
So was United wrong for handling it the way they did? Absolutely!
Could the passenger also have prevented being dragged out and injured? Absolutely!
Both bear some responsibility on what happened. If you think this is 100% on United and Dao, could have not prevented the situation from escalating, then that is where I will disagree with you as would the people you are calling Pro United.
Who bears more responsibility? This is where people will disagree.
I lean towards United for putting themselves in the situation to begin with and then handling it completely inappropriately once the situation occurred. But this doesn't completely let the passenger off, as he could have just walked off and then filed suit to be compensated accordingly for their bad business practice.
None. He paid and was on the plane minding his own business. If United wants a seat, they can keep increasing their offer.
Or say there is a mechanical problem and have everybody get off the plane? Then once he is off, say he has been bumped and not let him on the plane.
None? C'mon, Man! He could have prevented being dragged off just like the other 3 passengers that were boarded and bumped did. Just as United could have offered a million dollars to get someone to get off. He absolutely could have prevented being dragged off just like United could have prevented it.
As stated above, United bears more responsibility. I am thinking like 70%. Dao 30%.
When I go into a business as a paying customer, I am not responsible to shoulder the fallout from the mismanagement of that business. Also, what is with this idea of obedience to corporate masters? Maybe I should be ordered at gunpoint by the police to go in the back and peel potatoes if Applebees runs out of french fries?
United can get their act together or pound sand.
Legally Dao was 100% correct and United 100% at fault. United had zero legal rationale even per the laws and rules placed by Congress AND United's own legal team in its contract curtailing normal Constitutional and other common law protections specifically to protect the airline and screw over the passengers. When you're so out of line that even the Congress measures you bought and paid for AND your own legal team did not provide coverage because even they couldn't envision airline employees being that stupid...it was the airline 100% out of line. To suggest that Dao should have complied "just cause they were law enforcement" even if they were not on duty (maybe there's two stories as everyone wants to avoid paying millions) and 100% wrong is completely unAmerican in my book. Yet the old flagwaving set is mainly the limited few still supporting United online.
I get that caving is usually the smart play when faced with the overwhelming manpower of United's jackbooted thugs and giant army of corporate lawyers, but isn't Resistance against great odds when you are in the right the ACTUAL "American thing" to do? If it was logic and history being applied to the question then absolutely Dao was maybe the most "American" American we've seen in awhile. But thanks to political situations we can't discuss here and probably a decent dose of racism, we get where the flag wavers seem to hate Dao and love United.
Last edited:
I would normally agree with you on the "LE asked, just do it." I tend to lean to pro-LE. But in this case, I disagree. They turned to LE because they screwed up and had blinders on about about how they should peacefully resolve the issue they created. "Other people left, and they had no injuries" sounds a lot like a threat. Do it, else you will get hurt.
While I agree with you on crazy he will get millions, thats the world we live in. And to be clear, his attorney will end up getting millions as well. If it wasn't for our screwed up legal system, being "victimized" wouldn't be so profitable. Wheres the lets hate on lawyers thread, that should be resurrected.
I agree, but there is some truth to what he is getting at. I keep typing and deleting my post re corporations and govt (elected) officials and their relationship with the people they serve. Its too early on a monday to get fired up about that subject.
Latest posts
-
-
Softball FSU honors seniors, sweeps UNC, picks up 14th straight win- Latest: Bob Ferrante
-
