United airlines

[LambdaDelta]

stop defending corporations for reprehensible acts

the "both sides" argument is absolute bull**** and only serves to undermine the *actual* issue of blatant assault

 

[Soda Fox]

stop defending corporations for reprehensible acts

the "both sides" argument is absolute bull**** and only serves to undermine the *actual* issue of blatant assault

So if you owned a business and someone wouldn't leave when you asked them to, and continued not to leave when you continued asking them to, what would you do?

Again, I'm not agreeing with the airlines actions in the slightest, they had plenty of other routes to take and chose what I think is the wrong one, but I also think a business should be able to defend it's property and adhere to its contracts.

I've read that this guy was not the only person who was told to get off the plane that day but he was the only one to not comply when asked. While again I think the airline should have accepted offers from others to be removed in this man's place, the airline should still be able to remove someone if it's part of the contact to do so. The guy chose to fight to keep his seat. He could have gotten off as requested.

Edit: Don't get me wrong. I don't think United was in the right here, not even close. And I'll certainly never use their services after this and am glad their stocks are plummeting and they're losing money because of this. But I still don't think they're 100% to blame is all I'm saying.

 

[LambdaDelta]

you're literally saying you don't agree with the airline's actions while also throwing the victim under the bus for pretty blatant racial discrimination under the guise of contracts

pick one side, because you can't have both

 

[Soda Fox]

you're literally saying you don't agree with the airline's actions while also throwing the victim under the bus for pretty blatant racial discrimination under the guise of contracts

pick one side, because you can't have both

I added an edit. And I can definitely "choose both" because as a third party I can see both sides of the issue.

 

[moonford]

I hadn't heard about this until now, I really could care less about the UA or how it will suffer. I'm more concerned about the man and so should everyone else, it's a terrible thing to do to another person and it's inexcusable. I didn't watch the video and I haven't read any articles but I know enough to realize that it's a terrible and unnecessary situation which really should have been handled better. What makes it worse is that he was a doctor who had clients to tend to and he explained this but he still got booted out and beaten to the point were he wanted to die? What the hell? That's disgusting. The United Airlines needs to suffer badly like that man, the need to suffer to the point were they can't recover but unfortunately they will because they have money.

I'm just rolling my eyes and sighing a lot at this...Messed up world...

 

[Red Cat]

I don't think anyone ever deserves to be hurt. However, I also don't support people willfully breaking contacts because they feel entitled to do so. It's unfortunate that this situation came to blows, but if the contract he signed when purchasing the tickets, probably fine print but in writing nonetheless, stated that his ticket purchase did not ensure him a seat on the plane, then he was willfully trespassing. If someone is trespassing on your property, I don't expect you to do nothing and just let it happen either. That's why I'm saying it's, as far as I can tell, the fault of both parties. From what I read most airline tickets don't guaranty you a seat and legally can be exchanged for vouchers and a ride on a later flight. And while that might not be 100% consumer friendly, if it's the law then it should, until changed, be begrudgingly followed. We can't have a land where people follow whatever laws they feel is right, because what's right to you and me might be considered punishable by death to someone else. I'm being a little extreme but depending on where you are in the world some seemingly nonsensical laws are punishable by death.

It may have been legal for UA to do what they did, but legal isn't always right and UA is rightfully in PR hell for this incident. Yeah, when push comes to shove (pun intended) UA had to get some passengers off the plane because they were overbooked, but using the fine print in their tickets to forcibly remove passengers should only be used as a last resort. After all, it's their fault for being overbooked, not the passengers. They should have kept increasing the compensation for seats until they got enough passengers to volunteer to leave. This is going to cost UA a lot more money than if they would have just offered $5,000 - $10,000 to people to get off the plane.

 

[carp]

tis bad but worse stuff happenin

 

[Corrie]

Definitely horrible and I hope that United Airlines got a bad enough rep by this to make a large amount of people avoid to use their services. They deserve to lose business.

- - - Post Merge - - -

It may have been legal for UA to do what they did, but legal isn't always right and UA is rightfully in PR hell for this incident. Yeah, when push comes to shove (pun intended) UA had to get some passengers off the plane because they were overbooked, but using the fine print in their tickets to forcibly remove passengers should only be used as a last resort. After all, it's their fault for being overbooked, not the passengers. They should have kept increasing the compensation for seats until they got enough passengers to volunteer to leave. This is going to cost UA a lot more money than if they would have just offered $5,000 - $10,000 to people to get off the plane.

Overbooking is a thing for planes and I think it's bull. So what if you have an empty seat? Why is that our problem? What happens if everyone shows up? It'll be a freaking mess.

 

[forestyne]

The airline are at fault. They are at fault for overbooking and suddenly deciding "hey, I'll put this person here and kick this person off". They are at fault for causing injury and using brute force to the man who was kicked off. They are at fault for not giving him a refund.

 

[lostineverfreeforest]

you're literally saying you don't agree with the airline's actions while also throwing the victim under the bus for pretty blatant racial discrimination under the guise of contracts

pick one side, because you can't have both

Been following this incident closely and there is absolutely no evidence of racism being a motivating factor for his selection. Just sayin'.

With that said, I've been shafted by United before and already really disliked them as a company. Regardless of whether or not they were legally in the right to remove him (which does seem to be the case), there are a million ways this situation could have been handled better. I have no intention of ever flying them again, and didn't after how they ****ed me, but I suspect this won't actually hurt them in the long run. It's ****ed and sad but that's the way it goes.

 

[Red Cat]

Overbooking is a thing for planes and I think it's bull. So what if you have an empty seat? Why is that our problem? What happens if everyone shows up? It'll be a freaking mess.

Overbooking supposedly reduces ticket prices because often some people miss the flight for whatever reason so if the airline can sell more tickets, then they don't have to charge as much per ticket. The practice isn't a bad thing if there ultimately are enough seats for everyone who shows up, but airlines need to have better contingency plans in case everyone actually shows up.

 

[Dogemon]

Just wanted to say that UA's direct policy says they cannot remove someone for overbooking once they are already seated. Also the other people that were taking off the plane? Yeah they had to sleep on the FLOOR because UA could not provide early enough transportation for the new flight they would have to take.

 

[Soda Fox]

Just wanted to say that UA's direct policy says they cannot remove someone for overbooking once they are already seated. Also the other people that were taking off the plane? Yeah they had to sleep on the FLOOR because UA could not provide early enough transportation for the new flight they would have to take.

I did not know that about the policy but I'm getting pretty tired of emotional appeals.

Don't take what I'm going to say the wrong way. Again, I'm a third party looking in. I think regardless of policy UA should not have done this, but at the end of the day the plane is their property and if they ask you to get off you should do it. Research and sue them after but he chose to stay even when 3 police are in your face telling you to leave. He ended up injured due to noncompliance.

However one good thing did come from this and it was the media attention because of what happened. If it happened to him, it's happened to hundreds before and probably other people were injured in this practice as well. Not to make light of Rosa Parks but this is in a similar vein. This could change something.

**
The reason I come here and argue toward law and compliance is because I think, at least in the US where this happened, most laws are reasonable and seek to protect all involved. What I don't want to do is come to the internet and rile people up and get them emotionally charged to a point they might disregard the law and get themselves hurt. All I want is for people to consider both sides of a story before splitting the world into black and white, 100% right and 100% wrong. There is a lot of grey area to consider in almost any situation.


Edit : I see they added the part of the policy to not remove seated passengers after this happened. And I also see that places are saying that UA had "no legal right to remove him" but federal law does allow airlines to request authorities to remove people from their planes. This stuff is the gray area I'm talking about.

Please just don't think that because something feels wrong to you that you're in the right and will get what you want done. What one person feels is right might feel wrong to someone else and visa versa. Be careful in your emotional appeals because they could end up only harming you.

 

[KaydeeKrunk]

What about the scorpion? Was it someone's carry-on? I only heard briefly about it but I was laughing. SCORPIONS ON A PLANE(2017)

 

[Draoii]

federal law does allow airlines to request authorities to remove people from their planes.

Remove them. Not drag them along the ground to the point of injury. People offered their seats up instead but were ignored and he was forced off the plane.

 

[Tao]

you're literally saying you don't agree with the airline's actions while also throwing the victim under the bus for pretty blatant racial discrimination under the guise of contracts

pick one side, because you can't have both

Source?

This seems to me like something where the victim just happened to be a minority rather than being targeted because of that. Could have as easily have happened to a white guy if they were sat there, or a black guy, or a clown.


I don't think what happened was right either, I just don't think this should be turned into a racial issue when from what I've seen/read, and do prove me wrong, race had nothing to do with it. Doing so just ignores all the other contributing factors that resulted in this situation in the first place.

 

[Soda Fox]

Remove them. Not drag them along the ground to the point of injury. People offered their seats up instead but were ignored and he was forced off the plane.

And how would you move someone who refuses to move? Probably drag them right?

Again not saying it's right. But here's what I think happened.

UA employees told to kick 4 people off the plane. They attempt to do so by taking volunteers, but no one offers so they just choose some people to remove. Maybe this is by who paid least for their seat, maybe they choose seats at random. One guy won't leave. They call security and stay out of it otherwise from here. Security shows up and attempt to get the guy off. Guy still refuses do they start to drag him off. Others offer their seats but at this point UA employees are staying out of it and security is removing who they were told to remove, which is their job not to go against their orders and take someone else in this guys' place.

I think with better communication someone elselse could've Tannen the guy's place but the communication just wasn't there.

I don't think this was triggered by race. This was lack of communication and a lot of people with different views doing what they thought was "right".

 

[Soot Sprite]

This is terrible, and while I haven't had an issue with airlines to this extent I have had problems with anoter airline about Seats. I paid extra to have a seat by the window closer to the front of the plane and some man who boarded before I did sat in my seat instead then absolutely refused to get up. Instead of the staff asking him to get up they asked me to switch seats with him instead because he insisted on sitting there and the flight was completely booked.

So really, I paid close to $60 more for a more expensive seat to only get stuck in the middle of two people closer to the back of the plane. The fact that they did something to that extent to get that man off the plane for a seat for their own crew member is ridiculous.

 

[Dogemon]

Would like to note that pointing out how inhumanly a company has treated customers is not an emotional appeal, but I have seen some people on social media jumping the gun on this with the wrong motives in mind. An emotional appeal is something that has no legal ground to stand on. Forcing people to sleep on the floor of an airport as a result of multiple mistakes on the part of the airline, who then did not provide proper adjustments and accommodations, is something that you can very easily sue for as mistreatment and also under the rule that UA is obligated to provide suitable accommodations for flight issues as a result of the airline's mistakes.

Similarly, it is not a grey area at all on this issue when it comes to UA's policy. They are legally obligated to obey their seated/vacated policy when it comes to kicking people off to make room. The man was under no legal obligation to leave and the only people who WERE allowed to ask him to leave were the police that boarded after, who were also simply told to remove the man from the plane for being a disturbance. The law enforcement agency will most likely be came after and then they will also sue UA, as it very much seems like they were not informed of the circumstances in which the man was being removed at all.

I'm not emotional when it comes to businesses. I'm all about money and smart moves, both in the business for employees and for PR. UA has no legal leg to stand on right now and the only blame you can remotely put on the doctor is for not obeying the order of law enforcement. Airlines can also not request law enforcement to take people off their planes without probable cause. As I said, it seems like they either lied, or were unaware of their own company's policy, as it was not a disturbance to follow the legally binding policy of UA, and that is the only thing the man could possibly be considered doing.

 

[Soda Fox]

Would like to note that pointing out how inhumanly a company has treated customers is not an emotional appeal, but I have seen some people on social media jumping the gun on this with the wrong motives in mind. An emotional appeal is something that has no legal ground to stand on. Forcing people to sleep on the floor of an airport as a result of multiple mistakes on the part of the airline, who then did not provide proper adjustments and accommodations, is something that you can very easily sue for as mistreatment and also under the rule that UA is obligated to provide suitable accommodations for flight issues as a result of the airline's mistakes.

Similarly, it is not a grey area at all on this issue when it comes to UA's policy. They are legally obligated to obey their seated/vacated policy when it comes to kicking people off to make room. The man was under no legal obligation to leave and the only people who WERE allowed to ask him to leave were the police that boarded after, who were also simply told to remove the man from the plane for being a disturbance. The law enforcement agency will most likely be came after and then they will also sue UA, as it very much seems like they were not informed of the circumstances in which the man was being removed at all.

I'm not emotional when it comes to businesses. I'm all about money and smart moves, both in the business for employees and for PR. UA has no legal leg to stand on right now and the only blame you can remotely put on the doctor is for not obeying the order of law enforcement. Airlines can also not request law enforcement to take people off their planes without probable cause. As I said, it seems like they either lied, or were unaware of their own company's policy, as it was not a disturbance to follow the legally binding policy of UA, and that is the only thing the man could possibly be considered doing.

I wanted to say again that the policy not to kick already boarded passengers came after this event. At the time the policy was probably simply that in the case of overboarding employees should take volunteers to remove and then choose others in xyz fashion and call security in cases of noncompliance.

Again, not that I think it was right but I do think that, if UA decided to settle in court, they'd hire a better team of lawyers than the guy would and make a very strong case, but what would they have to gain other than "I told you so?" What will probably happen is they will settle out of court and implement their new policy. I'm guessing some* years down the line we'll be having a similar conversation to this only with a person denied boarding due to overbooking, so I wish companies would stop doing this practice which is clearly not consumer friendly.