The way airlines see us:
7 Likes
Especially if it had been actual money rather than, reportedly*, the books of $50 United vouchers, one voucher per flight.
* I.e., i have seen this reported but have not seen any kind of evidence one way or another.
2 Likes
David Dao is not a child, and telling him to be more submissive to authority is not a way for you to help him grow up.
You will find that this list of what’s needed has no limit. It grows and grows. New items will be added as necessary to keep proving that whatever happened, it was your kid’s fault.
9 Likes
That’s not how United’s vouchers work. You get one certificate for the full amount all up front good for one year from date of issue (plus separate certificates for hotel + food if offered). When you go to use it on the website you plug in the certificate number and it discounts the ticket price by the voucher amount. You can also use them to purchase tickets for somebody else - they do not have to be redeemed exclusively to the issued passenger.
Vouchers are for Voluntary re-bookings. The exception is if you’re involuntarily bumped you can request the full compensation amount in cash on the spot.
The CoC is a contract - not law. And like any contract there’s lots of room for interpretation and loopholes and it’s heavily weighted in favor of the airlines. I would think this would have to be litigated via lawsuit to get any real clarity on the legal bindings of each clause. Lots of people are starting to weigh in on their interpretations in other forums debating things like “What does the term ‘boarding’ mean?”
Historically, and especially after 9/11, airlines have been given lots of discretion for how they enforce the provisions of the CoC and I suspect that would still be true with this case. As stated earlier, the standard go-to phrase is “safety” - so all the airline has to do is claim the passenger was endangering the flight or crew (strongest argument for this is disobeying crew member instructions by refusing to deplane).
2 Likes
I got curious as to whether this was real. And what do you know – they’re Australian cows flying to China!
“The flights are possible, and profitable, because of China’s soaring demand for fresh beef and regulations that require imported live animals to be slaughtered close to their point of entry. That means that if you want to sell fresh steaks to China’s booming inland cities, like Chongqing, you need a big plane.” (Bloomberg - Are you a robot?)
What a weird, weird world.
edit: why is the reply business all screwy?
4 Likes
Actually they are going from Iceland to Kazakhstan. Even weirder right? The link is embedded in image but, here 'ya go:
Mooooo!
5 Likes
The invisible hand of the marketplace is truly wise and efficient.
9 Likes
Ha! Canadian cows traveling to Kazakhstan. That’s even weirder!
Thanks, I love stuff like this.
2 Likes
Ummm…of course David Dao is not a child. Strange interpretation of my comment.
What I was saying was, even though I know how much my experience still burns, and that I was doing the right thing when I stood up for my rights all alone on a dark, rural road with 3 armed “peace officers” taunting me, if I had kids (not sure why that phrase needs interpretation…) I would try to give them life lessons about how to live in the world as it is, with ideals intact, hopefully without putting themselves in needless danger. See? Even though I know I was doing right, I would encourage someone I love to consider a different course of action in a similar situation. That’s all.
I think most anyone who has found themselves in this situation can understand what I’m trying to say, even if electronic communications omit some of the nuance. I’d even wager that many people who haven’t found themselves in this situation understand what I’m trying to say. I’m not saying it’s awesome, or the best course of action, or that any of us should just lay down and let others trample our rights. I guess it’s no longer relevant to David Dao’s situation, but just the bigger thing I’m getting at is that sometimes we have to fight smarter, not harder, to uphold our freedoms.
Oh?
Guess you’re off topic then.
Maybe start a thread called, “What should I tell my children about talking to cops?”
Oh, you’re not happy with the manner in which Dr. Dao upheld his freedoms, and ours?
If any policies are changed, and If that Guantanamo sadist is fired again, it will be because Dao said “No!” when you would’ve said yes, and because he remained seated when you would’ve voluntarily left the plane.
If he did what you seem to think is the right thing, there would be no news story here, we would never have heard about it, and nothing would change. No freedoms would’ve been upheld whatsoever.
This is what upholding freedom looks like. Dao did nothing wrong.
6 Likes
She IS right, in that violent threats over this aren’t even remotely OK.
Here’s how obvious this is:
President Trump also weighed-in Wednesday, saying what happened to Dao was “horrible.”
In an Oval Office interview with the Wall Street Journal, Trump suggested that this kind of incident could be avoided in the future if carriers remove the upper limits on vouchers they offer passengers in return for giving up their seats.
“You know, there’s a point at which I’m getting off the plane … seriously,” said Trump. “They should have gone up higher. But to just randomly say, ‘You’re getting off the plane,’ that was terrible.”
3 Likes
Even a stopped clock, I guess.
10 Likes
I never meant to imply that he did. You seem determined to purposely misunderstand what I’m saying. That’s your prerogative.
I applaud your fiery spirit and hope life gives you many opportunities to stand up for your rights and be the change you hope to see in the world.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
