A man who complained about a $12 charge for a blanket cause the plane to be diverted to LA and affected all the passengers...
How did we come to this?
What is wrong with or airline industry?
Can a $12 blanket be compared to disturbing flight plans for 200 passengers?
Where is the common sense?
The pilot and attendandent over reacted...
There was no justification for diverting the flight plan, period.
Hawaiian air, you have a serious problem if that is your policy...
Yes, the pilot and attendant over reacted. And so did the idiot passenger having a temper tantrum because he can't have something for nothing.
I have been on planes where it was freezing cold. To not give a small blanket as a courtesy is just bad customer relations... When did making a few $$ trump common sense? The passenger did not over react... It is the system that has gone bonkers. If an alien arrives on earth tomorrow, they would say how crazy are these humans... the pilot and attendant should be severely disciplined and get a refresher training on dealing with customers. BTW, how much did they cost the company and the tax payers by this fiasco? Was it worth the $12???
Yeah, it's poor customer relations. But that does not excuse a temper tantrum on an airplane full of people - nothing does.
Disciplining employees for not giving away what the company has decreed has a cost would be insane, though. "Dealing with" customers does not mean to simply give them whatever they want free of charge.
Nor does discussion of tax payer costs have anything to do with it - what is the cost of cops arresting a shoplifter for stealing $5 worth of merchandise? What do companies pay each year for surveillance and security to halt shoplifting?
You are reaching..
This guy is not a criminal...
Read what was said and reported by eye witnesses...
He did not threaten the pilot or the attendant. He was going to complaint to the Company executives...
The English language is not that complicated.
A new video on United Airline dragging a person off the plane for overbooking.
This is another incident where the airline is out of control and lack total common sense.
I can't believe there was no other way to resolve this.
A huge lawsuit is now on the table...
He was not drug off "for overbooking" and United Airlines employees did not drag him anywhere.
He was drug off for refusing to walk himself, and the cops did the dragging. Yes, there was another way to resolve a passenger that refuses to leave the plane: let the plane sit at the gate until he leaves. Of course, all the other passengers will miss connecting flights...
I WILL say, however, that I'm not at all sure just why the flight was overbooked. The practice is legal and common, but apparently the reason was that United had employees they wanted to transport and put that need above that of passengers. It would be nice to hear United's side of that part of it, but we never will.
What do you mean? This case will be in the public eye for a while and may cost the United CEO his job. The details will come out one way or another. There are too many eye witnesses.
As a citizen who flies regularly on United and other airlines, I side with the passenger in this case. There are other incidents when the passenger was clearly out of line and I would suport their removal, such as Alec Baldwin refusing to turn off his cell phone on takeoff...
In this case, it is clear that they over booked. They then offered to passengers voluntarily give up their seats for a voucher, no one took it. They randomly selected 4 people and asked them to leave.
The 4 seats were for another United crew scheduled for another flight.
Here is where they could have done something more reasonable.
1. They could offer more money... up to $1450.
2. They could have replace the flight attendent with the other crew, perhaps...
3. They could have flown the other 4 crew by private jet or another airline...It was a short flight.
4. They could have hired a car service to drive the new crew to their destination.
What is unexceptible is to forcibly remove someone who has paid a ticket and have already boarded and seated.
Here is where I think we all should stop and remember the Golden Rule.
Treat others like you would want to ge treated.
I would ask the United CEO to imagine, what if it was him on that flight? Or one of his loved ones? Being asked to leave. Would he be OK with what went down? Hemmm
That's what I said - we don't know why it happened, from United's side. Why were people allowed to board when there weren't enough seats? What happened that they apparently forgot their employees until everyone is on board? Was there another plane that could get them there on time? Could they have driven and got there in time? We don't know and never will, and asking the questions or saying it was possible does NOT mean it was.
But none of that excuses the behavior of a man booted because of overbooking, and if force is necessary to clear the plane for takeoff, then force is necessary.
Forcefully removing a paying customer from the plane should never be necessary unless they're posing some threat.
Had they kept offering more money to voluntarily get off the plane they would have found four people happy to do it at some price.
If they weren't prepared to offer more than $800 then they should have found someone else to do whatever the employees needed to do at the destination.
Worst case scenario, if they offer thousands of dollars and for some reason no one wants it, or if they can't find people to cover a shift until the employees can get there, they suck up whatever consequences there are as a result of their mistake. The passenger had every right to refuse to leave, he paid for the service and had obligations he needed to attend to just as the United employees did. The difference being the passenger planned to be there on time for his obligations and United did not. The passenger should not be the one to get the boot in this situation.
You mean they should have grabbed someone off the street to pilot the next airliner to it's destination. I don't really see that as a solution. But I do agree that no passenger should ever require police force to get them to leave after being required to do so. Get up and walk off the plane rather than wait for the cops to drag you off.
But beyond that, what you're really saying is that if one doesn't like the law they don't have to follow it - just kick up enough fuss and you're exempt from what others have to do.
The passenger had the right...to follow the contract he agreed to, which includes provisions for being booted because of overbooking. Somehow that seems left out of your scenario, but it IS a rather important part.
United had no obligations to be met? How do you figure? They have an obligation to be there on time, and to get the next flight off the ground on time. Hundreds and hundreds of people are depending on that, as opposed to a couple of customers of the passenger.
Yes, but people have a choice of airlines. They can choose to fly with another carrier.
That is the beauty of a competitive, free enterprise system. If United wants to be the friendly skies, they better shape up or loose customers. This is a teaching moment for all you millennials who thinks socialism is just great.
Try having your way in a socialist country. You have no choice but obey, no matter how insane.
They did have obligations to be met but they failed to meet them, clearly. That is their fault and they should have found a solution that didn't require people being removed from a plane they had already boarded. Again, everyone has a price. If you screw up then own it and suck up having to offer a little more incentive to have people voluntarily give up their seat.
I keep hearing that - that they should have found a solution other than removing people from an overbooked flight. Yours is typical - pay more money, but have you considered what putting it up for unlimited bidding will do future costs, and thereby future costs of airline tickets? You also assume they "screwed up", but overbooking is the accepted practice, both legally and common business practice. The only "screw up" appears (appears!) to have been boarding the plane with more people than there were seats instead of removing people from the boarding line outside of the plane, and a mistake that simple is no reason for the furor going on.
(I tend to think this specific character would have run ahead of the line and gotten on even after being told he could not board. Same scenario, then.)
Yes, much of the wording in the overbooking policies is "refuse passengers from boarding the plane." I think that's where this became a story. I'm not sure he would have tried to force himself on the plane had he been turned away at the gate. There's no way to know. In my opinion that's a calmer environment and a point where you still expect that something might not go as planned with your flight. But the fact that they didn't realize that they had overbooked until they let everyone on the plane makes a difference. It's something I'm assuming doesn't happen all too often so not really setting a precedent for future overbookings where they actually follow procedure and bump people off before boarding the flight. It's a unique situation in which I think they should have stepped up and said "we messed up and let too many people on" and tried a little harder than usual to find volunteers or another solution.
You make it sound like it was a small thing...only screw up...
That is the REAL problem here. They allowed people to board and be seated before trying to remove them last minute because their own crew needed a flight to their next gig.
This incident is caused by their arrogance thinking they can do whatever they want when they want and the passengers be damned.
One passenger refused to play this game and may have very valid reasons.
I tell you a personal thing that happened while I was in China last year. We needed to go to another city after our tour and we were book on a local flight to Shenzhen. It was a late pm flight and no flight were running after this one. Two hours before our flight, I got a notice on my iphone, the flight was cancelled. We had to scramble and rebook on another airline. Luckily we found one with the help of my local relatives. We were told later that it is a common occurance in China. Usually, a late flight if they don't get enough passengers to fill the seats, say at least 50%, they cancel the flight rather than loose money.
Would you like to live in a country where this is common practice?
Bloomberg says, United Continental Holdings Inc. stocks took a dive.
China's social media site Sina Weibo (equivalent of Twitter) was top trending with the hashtag #UnitedForcesPassengerOffPlane.
Members are outraged on Reddit for deleting the video dragging the passenger off the plane. More censorship. I expect Twitter and Facebook to censor the video yet.
I am a Chinese American. I don't see this case was race related. The fact that 1 of the 4 people picked randomly was Asian should not matter in any way. It was wrong to do what they did no matter who it was done to.
I didn't see it as race related either and hope it isn't made out to be that by anyone. We know how the race baiters can be, but I don't believe will happen in this instance. Now, if that was a black man we'd be hearing the blah, blah, blah.
Added: we just don't know all of what goes on behind the scenes sometimes.
No, they don't do whatever they want; they do whatever the law says they can. There is a difference, and the passenger refusing to play the game decided HE was above the law. Didn't work so well, and whatever personal "reasons" he had to put himself above the law didn't matter much.
No, I wouldn't want to live there. Of course, I don't like that they can refuse to allow a paid up passenger to board, either, but they can and do. We either accept that or don't fly.
Here is the stats...
"According to official data, more than 40,000 paying customers were bumped off U.S. flights last year against their will, although in the vast majority of cases that happens at the gate, well before the boarding process has begun.
That figure doesn't include those who voluntarily gave up their seat on oversold flights and received an incentive."
That seems like a very high number. Something is wrong with the booking system if that many people are kicked off flights.
I read it to be 50,000, but includes those voluntarily giving up their seats. Personally, I don't like the idea of booting people because the airline overbooked. I understand why they do it - passengers don't show up to fill the seats they've booked - but I would rather pay a higher ticket price than miss my cruise ship, my mother's funeral or the race I've planned for a year to participate in. I could even live with requiring tickets to be paid for in advance and NO refunds at all - you die a week before the flight, too bad but no refund.
But most people seem to disagree. They would rather save a few bucks and risk waiting hours or a day to continue their trip.
It is a free market and a free market solution is best.
For those who have to be some place, the money is not an issue.
For some, such as a student, a delay of one day is no big deal and if they can make some money via a voucher, so much the better.
This over booking is understandable when you try to maximize profit by filling planes.
The problem as always is with the level... Someone allowed the level to rise to a point of breaking.
I have noticed in mymown experience, most flights today are full.
In the old days, there are usually a few empty seats. They use to offer standby tickets for last minute discounts. No more...
Perhaps, that would be a better way.
Allow the seats to book only 95%, and leave the 5% for standby or for extraneous circumstances like this case. That would remove this type of incident.
I don't quite see a law requiring 5% of seats to be reserved for standby fliers as being "free market". Nor even the legal requirement to pay passengers being booted.
Not positive, but I think part of the reason planes are fuller than they used to be is that discounts ARE offered, increasing as the day of the flight approaches. Cheaper fares are often available as airlines try to fill the planes that way. Perhaps they should kick off the last ticket purchased, although I wouldn't be happy with that, either - I like the "coin toss" best, wherein all share the same possibility. If overbooking is to be allowed anyway - I personally would make it illegal or with very high penalty (thousands, not hundreds of dollars) for violating the contract.
No one is saying it is a law or make it a law. It should be common sense guideline for a business to follow...
If they consistently have overbooking where people are booted, that means the system is not working right. One way to fix it internally for the airline, is to allow a cusion. A 5% on a 250 passenger flight is only 12 seats. That will allow for most incidents where for one reason or another, they need to fill a seat last minute...
When I hear 40,000 as a number, my flag went up. That is too high.
See, that's what most people fail to realize; that it IS a law and that it IS "common sense business guidelines". That the system is working perfectly - overbook every flight possible and then kick some off to maintain profits while keeping ticket prices low.
I don't like it, you don't like it, but the majority of people seem to accept it as the price to be paid for low cost flights. Certainly the legislature does!
"Low cost flights"? Is that a thing down there? I don't recognize those words strung together outside of Europe.
I am willing to bet United will cave on this. It is too big a story. It is not going away. Once the idea is brought to people's attention, something has to give. Either they change or they loose customers...
I had no idea before yesterday that 40,000 people were kicked off planes on a regular basis. Now that I know, I will be watching this going forward. I am flying in a week to the west coast. If this happens, I will know how to deal with it. So will many other passengers, once they understand this issue. If airlines are putting profits ahead of paying customers, they will pay a price.
I don't know what you think United will do; I presume they will give him the legal minimum ($800?) but there isn't much else left. If they had hurt him and dragged him off the plane he might get damages (doubt it, though), but it wasn't.
And what will you do if required to give up your seat? Scream loudly and refuse to move until the cops forcibly remove you?
Of course they put profits first; without profits there is no airline to ride. If their goal was increasing ridership only, we'd all be served steak for lunch with free alcohol drinks, there would be no baggage fee and we'd all be waiting in the VIP lounge of the airport. But we don't; either there is a reasonable profit or they don't survive.
I really suspect a part of the problem is the public; my brother in law flew out of my city the other week, only to find they had overbooked in Denver, his connecting flight. He was happy to take $800 for his two seats, waiting a few hours for the next plane. Many people are - many times (mostly return flights) I would be too as I'm retired and an extra day or week away is just more play time.
Crazy stuff! ... Remember the movie "Airplane"?
Airplane Classic Scenes ( at the 6:43 mark )
Maybe this is apart of airlines training manual. wink
Here is link to story...
https://www.yahoo.com/news/hawaii-bound … 36768.html
So the FBI was called...
I don't want my tax dollars wasted on this kind of insanity.
Shouldn't they be investigationg the leaks in our intelligence?
BTW, if I was on that plane as a passenger, I would file a lawsuit against the airline. They have disrupted my schedule and 200 other passengers...for what? What can a 60 year old man do on a plane? Any reasonable person would be unruly when confronted with such nonsense...
Here is the quote - “It was just a complaint about a blanket, about the cost of the blanket, correct,” Pedegro said. “He was upset about the charge for the blanket and asked for a corporate phone number. They provided him with it and (then) he said, ‘I’d really like to take somebody behind the woodshed over this.’ They diverted the aircraft because of that statement.”
So apparently, the attendant and the pilot took that statement as a threat to the pilot???
Do they even speak English? It is clear to me what he meant by it...
offered $800, when policy is that able to offer up to 400% or $1325, They should have offered the max after 800 wasn't taken.
What was not protocol was the passengers weren't not bumped at the ticket gate. That's very poor planning. Should have known 15 minutes before boarding that needed 4 seats and just bump off the last 4 people boarding with compensation.
Yes, I totally agree. Anyway you look at it, the airline screwed up.
What is not discussed is the total tyranical attitudes of airline officials...
In another case a while back, I read a flight was kept on the tarmac for over 6 hours and the pilot refused to go back to the gate, even when people asked to leave. So why can't they do that?
The lesson for all is, next time a flight is delayed over 2 hours, have a fit and tandrum and they will have to eject you...
Is this what the airlines want to happen? Haha
by wiserworld4 years ago
What was your worst flight experience?
by ptosis10 months ago
by mod2vint7 years ago
I think they are filing charges on the wrong person! The passenger should have been arrested. Yes the flight attendant may have gotten carried away, but I can say when dealing with the public day after day, sometimes...
by Michael Willis7 years ago
Amazing story I heard on ABC news this evening. Plane missing and finally found. Pilots claim in heated discussion on company policy. (yeah right) Tower controllers could not get in contact with pilots. Asleep? More...
by talfonso7 years ago
Most of you have seen this YouTube video of a woman throwing a huge fit like a toddler. You might have seen it in the news, or read it in articles. When I saw this one, I laughed, but I feel for her. I wished that would...
by karl4 years ago
After reading this article http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/why-ai … 03449.html i was wondering should airlines be offering larger seating for those who have to pay more?I believe it raises many questions and...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.