What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Doctor violently dragged from full United flight (1 Viewer)

Chinese folks are ticked saying United chose him due to race. United is trying to build business in China. Could hurt their prospects there.

 
chet said:
Most top tier levels of frequent flyer programs guarantee their members an economy seat on any flight if the member pays full fare.  Yeah, Timsochet is way off base again.
Click to expand...
If they're booking last minute, they should be the ones to forfeit if it comes to that and it should be made clear upon sale of said ticket.  When you book a flight the systems should be able to know if it's an overbooked sale and let the person know.  Frequent Flyer status be damned in this case.  

 
Scoresman said:
If they're booking last minute, they should be the ones to forfeit if it comes to that and it should be made clear upon sale of said ticket.  When you book a flight the systems should be able to know if it's an overbooked sale and let the person know.  Frequent Flyer status be damned in this case.  
Click to expand...
What if you're booking last minute to attend a funeral?

 
MarvinTScamper said:
it won't, and they can't make it disappear.   No way they pay 8 figures because the security contractor screwed the pooch.  PEOPLE LOSE THEIR LIVES IN HOSPITAL BOTCHUPS AND DON'T GET 8 FIGURES.  Come on chet.
Click to expand...
Did you miss the part where I said I don't think he'll get it?  

6-7 figs (low).  UA won't want a court case because of some of the reasons I listed above and they will have to pay enough to convince him not to go that route.  UA has far more downside than any doctor in a hospital.  Come on MTS.

 
chet said:
Did you miss the part where I said I don't think he'll get it?  

6-7 figs (low).  UA won't want a court case because of some of the reasons I listed above and they will have to pay enough to convince him not to go that route.  UA has far more downside than any doctor in a hospital.  Come on MTS.
Click to expand...
No, but I saw where you suggested it.  I disagree with the rest.  Public companies aren't quick with the checkbook.  If they can get him to settle for less than a short lawsuit would cost, sure.

 
United stocks have lost about a billion in value so far today. Things are going well. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tom Skerritt said:
What if you're booking last minute to attend a funeral?
Click to expand...
If you start bumping people off flights by ranking how important their reasons are for travelling then suddenly everyone's going to have a funeral to go to or dying relative to go visit.  

You could still ask for volunteers in the case of an overbooking where everyone shows up and only bump the last minute booker as a last resort.  Just let it be known on all overbooked  ticket sales that you are the one overbooking the plane and what that might mean.  

 
Scoresman said:
If you start bumping people off flights by ranking how important their reasons are for travelling then suddenly everyone's going to have a funeral to go to or dying relative to go visit.  

You could still ask for volunteers in the case of an overbooking where everyone shows up and only bump the last minute booker as a last resort.  Just let it be known on all overbooked  ticket sales that you are the one overbooking the plane and what that might mean.  
Click to expand...


Scoresman said:
If they're booking last minute, they should be the ones to forfeit if it comes to that and it should be made clear upon sale of said ticket.  When you book a flight the systems should be able to know if it's an overbooked sale and let the person know.  Frequent Flyer status be damned in this case.  
Click to expand...
I have no issue with airlines prioritizing their frequent fliers and if that means bumping someone with no status, so be it.  Just do it before they get on the plane and don't have a mall cop beat the #### out of a customer with a seat and a valid ticket.

 
TobiasFunke said:
It'll be interesting to see if anyone can uncover any negative incidents in the pasts of United Airlines or Chicago law enforcement.
Click to expand...
If there's anything negative in the history of the security guys it'll come out. And they'll get crucified.

 
3C's said:
Chinese folks are ticked saying United chose him due to race. United is trying to build business in China. Could hurt their prospects there.
Click to expand...
It took awhile for the racial angle to be brought in, kind of surprised.

This story is perfect for today's brand of journalism. It has everything: everyone hates flying, everyone does it, caught on cell phone, airline CEO doosh pouring gasoline on the fire, blood, makes for fantastic twitter and facebook posting. Mix in this guy looks to have some shady #### in his past, now add "racism".

It is already reached annoying levels, should peak in a day or so.

 
The General said:
It took awhile for the racial angle to be brought in, kind of surprised.

This story is perfect for today's brand of journalism. It has everything: everyone hates flying, everyone does it, caught on cell phone, airline CEO doosh pouring gasoline on the fire, blood, makes for fantastic twitter and facebook posting. Mix in this guy looks to have some shady #### in his past, now add "racism".

It is already reached annoying levels, should peak in a day or so.
Click to expand...
Journalism, lolz

 
MarvinTScamper said:
No, but I saw where you suggested it.  I disagree with the rest.  Public companies aren't quick with the checkbook.  If they can get him to settle for less than a short lawsuit would cost, sure.
Click to expand...
Don't change my words. I didn't ask what they would pay to settle with the guy--I asked what they'd pay to make it disappear.  Completely different. You don't think UA would pay 8-figures to make this whole thing magically disappear?  Their stock is down 4% today.  Do you think that gets Munoz' attention?

 
i think the negative attention in the asia market is probably what makes uniteds board the most worried well that and that now passengers have read all about how to get paid actual cash money instead of vouchers for the last couple of days that has to hurt the old future outlook forecast for stock advisers in the greater stock markets of the nations that allow stock trading so maybe consider a short put and some options and derivatives on this one take that to the swc financial forecast bank brochachos 

 
chet said:
Don't change my words. I didn't ask what they would pay to settle with the guy--I asked what they'd pay to make it disappear.  Completely different. You don't think UA would pay 8-figures to make this whole thing magically disappear?  Their stock is down 4% today.  Do you think that gets Munoz' attention?
Click to expand...
I wasn't trying to change your words.  I didn't realize we were talking hypothetical fantasy type stuff.  it's down 4%, BFD.  

 
Good read posted on a other blog's comments by a guy who says he is a lawyer:

1. First of all, it's airline spin to call this an overbooking. The statutory provision granting them the ability to deny boarding is about "OVERSELLING", which is specifically defined as booking more reserved confirmed seats than there are available. This is not what happened. They did not overbook the flight; they had a fully booked flight, and not only did everyone already have a reserved confirmed seat, they were all sitting in them. The law allowing them to deny boarding in the event of an oversale does not apply.

2. Even if it did apply, the law is unambiguously clear that airlines have to give preference to everyone with reserved confirmed seats when choosing to involuntarily deny boarding. They have to always choose the solution that will affect the least amount of reserved confirmed seats. This rule is straightforward, and United makes very clear in their own contract of carriage that employees of their own or of other carriers may be denied boarding without compensation because they do not have reserved confirmed seats. On its face, it's clear that what they did was illegal-- they gave preference to their employees over people who had reserved confirmed seats, in violation of 14 CFR 250.2a.

3. Furthermore, even if you try and twist this into a legal application of 250.2a and say that United had the right to deny him boarding in the event of an overbooking; they did NOT have the right to kick him off the plane. Their contract of carriage highlights there is a complete difference in rights after you've boarded and sat on the plane, and Rule 21 goes over the specific scenarios where you could get kicked off. NONE of them apply here. He did absolutely nothing wrong and shouldn't have been targeted. He's going to leave with a hefty settlement after this fiasco.

 
GroveDiesel said:
Good read posted on a other blog's comments by a guy who says he is a lawyer:

1. First of all, it's airline spin to call this an overbooking. The statutory provision granting them the ability to deny boarding is about "OVERSELLING", which is specifically defined as booking more reserved confirmed seats than there are available. This is not what happened. They did not overbook the flight; they had a fully booked flight, and not only did everyone already have a reserved confirmed seat, they were all sitting in them. The law allowing them to deny boarding in the event of an oversale does not apply.

2. Even if it did apply, the law is unambiguously clear that airlines have to give preference to everyone with reserved confirmed seats when choosing to involuntarily deny boarding. They have to always choose the solution that will affect the least amount of reserved confirmed seats. This rule is straightforward, and United makes very clear in their own contract of carriage that employees of their own or of other carriers may be denied boarding without compensation because they do not have reserved confirmed seats. On its face, it's clear that what they did was illegal-- they gave preference to their employees over people who had reserved confirmed seats, in violation of 14 CFR 250.2a.

3. Furthermore, even if you try and twist this into a legal application of 250.2a and say that United had the right to deny him boarding in the event of an overbooking; they did NOT have the right to kick him off the plane. Their contract of carriage highlights there is a complete difference in rights after you've boarded and sat on the plane, and Rule 21 goes over the specific scenarios where you could get kicked off. NONE of them apply here. He did absolutely nothing wrong and shouldn't have been targeted. He's going to leave with a hefty settlement after this fiasco.
Click to expand...
Link pls.

 
Some up and coming congressman (from a district that doesn't have a major airline HQ) will be bringing this issue to Congress and The Today Show by the end of the week.

 
i hope trump launches a bunch of cruise missles at united that will show them take that to the bank brohans 

 
The General said:
Some up and coming congressman (from a district that doesn't have a major airline HQ) will be bringing this issue to Congress and The Today Show by the end of the week.
Click to expand...
I can see it now. The same people who say there's too many regulations and "we need to let the market decide" will now be calling for a law that makes it illegal for airlines to overbook, and they must raise the cap on $$ payouts.

 
chet said:
Don't change my words. I didn't ask what they would pay to settle with the guy--I asked what they'd pay to make it disappear.  Completely different. You don't think UA would pay 8-figures to make this whole thing magically disappear?  Their stock is down 4% today.  Do you think that gets Munoz' attention?
Click to expand...
Probably not, he's an idiot. But it will get the board's attention

 
3C's said:
I can see it now. The same people who say there's too many regulations and "we need to let the market decide" will now be calling for a law that makes it illegal for airlines to overbook, and they must raise the cap on $$ payouts.
Click to expand...
Or not. Oof

 
GroveDiesel said:
Good read posted on a other blog's comments by a guy who says he is a lawyer:

1. First of all, it's airline spin to call this an overbooking. The statutory provision granting them the ability to deny boarding is about "OVERSELLING", which is specifically defined as booking more reserved confirmed seats than there are available. This is not what happened. They did not overbook the flight; they had a fully booked flight, and not only did everyone already have a reserved confirmed seat, they were all sitting in them. The law allowing them to deny boarding in the event of an oversale does not apply.

2. Even if it did apply, the law is unambiguously clear that airlines have to give preference to everyone with reserved confirmed seats when choosing to involuntarily deny boarding. They have to always choose the solution that will affect the least amount of reserved confirmed seats. This rule is straightforward, and United makes very clear in their own contract of carriage that employees of their own or of other carriers may be denied boarding without compensation because they do not have reserved confirmed seats. On its face, it's clear that what they did was illegal-- they gave preference to their employees over people who had reserved confirmed seats, in violation of 14 CFR 250.2a.

3. Furthermore, even if you try and twist this into a legal application of 250.2a and say that United had the right to deny him boarding in the event of an overbooking; they did NOT have the right to kick him off the plane. Their contract of carriage highlights there is a complete difference in rights after you've boarded and sat on the plane, and Rule 21 goes over the specific scenarios where you could get kicked off. NONE of them apply here. He did absolutely nothing wrong and shouldn't have been targeted. He's going to leave with a hefty settlement after this fiasco.
Click to expand...
This is more or less a consolidation of the things discussed on flyertalk yesterday.  Many of these issues are being overlooked in the press so they can show the videos more, but the facts here (while inconvenient for some) would indicate that UA absolutely didn't follow either the law, or their own state policies and probably both at one time or another.

They had no authority to IDB someone for a non-paying customer after boarding that wasn't causing a problem, none.  

I'm guessing both the flight, and gate agents had no idea about the limits of their policies with respect to boarding, and bumping people for employees and where the line is.  

 
AAABatteries said:
I know I'm going to hell for this but I can't stop laughing at this clip :lmao:  - hopefully the guy is ok.
Click to expand...
The whole scene is so bizarre that it is comical. 

Upon my initial viewing, I was shocked and appalled. But after rewatching the vids a dozen times, I couldn't help but crack up at some of the little details of the videos.

In the first video of the OP - watching the people's reactions is hilarious, especially the guy sitting next to the loud lady. When the Dr. is getting dragged out, he repositions himself to catch a glimpse then make this strange screaming sound when he sees the horror. :lmao:

Then somehow, the Dr. guy escapes the officers and runs back onto the plane!!?  :lmao:  How the #### do they allow this to happen???   :lmao:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The General said:
The stock will bounce back. It's not just money lost.
Click to expand...
It will definitely bounce back when this story fades but it's practically impossible to put an accurate figure on how much money they will lose over this. People all over the world will intentionally choose a different airline over United over this one incident. 

 
eoMMan said:
It will definitely bounce back when this story fades but it's practically impossible to put an accurate figure on how much money they will lose over this. People all over the world will intentionally choose a different airline over United over this one incident. 
Click to expand...
No they won't.  Boycotts of services have a very short half-life.  

 
FYI I'm on an American airlines flight just now and they are the nicest ever. Today might be the best day to fly in history

 
tommyboy said:
At least a mil. I'd take that and free travel for life for a few minutes of drama. This will end overbooking
Click to expand...
I doubt overbooking will end. The process of how they get the people "reaccomodated" will be addressed though.

I read that 40,000 people were overbooked and reassigned last year - including 3 from the flight with Dr. Feelgood. 

Some security guards probably not making a ton with not much training got irratated and screwed up here bigly. It all got caught on cell and is perfect fodder for news, late night talk show comedy, etc.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dkp993
United Flight 93 Todd Beamer Call Transcript -Must Read.
Replies
23
Views
2K
belljr
belljr
GregR
Greg's Useless Trivia #50 - 100 questions (75 greatest hits, 25 new)
Replies
19
Views
3K
GregR
GregR
(HULK)
Dave Berry's Year in Review
Replies
2
Views
1K
Joe Summer
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top