I really want there to be more to this story. I do not want it to simply be that his seat was the one chosen at random or what-have-you, and he just became belligerent and refused to get off. Tell me he was drunk or a jackass, or tell me that United is total bunch of jackwads who will pay through the damn nose for doing this to him.
I need someone to be the villain here.
If I can drive, I’m doing it. Dealing with the TSA and then being treated like crap by the airlines? No thanks!
The villain is the airline too cheap to buy someone off the flight so they assaulted a passenger.
United Airlines sucks huevos. And they’re not being unfairly covered – they really do suck. I’m at the point where I’ll pay more to fly on other airlines even when I’m the one footing the bill. Cram it with walnuts, United.
I suspect he was one of the four lowest-paying passengers. That seems to be the criteria the airlines use for bumping people.
(as noted as per their own contract, it’s too damn late once the guy’s in his seat).
I feel your Pain. United is “Company Preferred” and so anytime I’m flying with others for business, it’s going to be a United flight.
There’s no way they would choose at random. That would have risked choosing a “platinum” member who flies 5000 miles a week. I didn’t read yet but if I had to guess, the chosen people didn’t have any sort of status with them.
Alt-slogan: “The beatings will continue until morale improves.”
so, not exactly.
You might be right that it should have been handled pre boarding, and it certainly should not have been handled the way it was. However they can deny anyone boarding when a flight is oversold, and it was oversold in this case because the staff who needed to get to Louisville are prioritized to avoid further delays and mayhem in their network of flights, it’s part of how they add up the number of seats they’re authorized to sell (typically more than are physically present).
Their contract of carriage has enough vagaries and points that are open to interpretation that they have a lot of leeway.
“Boarding Priorities - If a flight is Oversold, no one may be denied boarding against his/her will until UA or other carrier personnel first ask for volunteers who will give up their reservations willingly in exchange for compensation as determined by UA. If there are not enough volunteers, other Passengers may be denied boarding involuntarily in accordance with UA’s boarding priority…”
https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriage.aspx#sec25
I think the main point of contention (aside from the obvious idiocy of resorting to violence) is whether or not the flight was oversold, and by United’s definition, it was.
And you’re probably not going to “volunteer” in that circumstance.
He was already boarded. That rule doesn’t apply.
Depends…Flight Out, probably not. Flight Home? Hell, yeah.
Yeah, United definitely screwed up. But this is what happens when a corporation is allowed to get too big to the point of being able to control government policies via lobbying. Guess why you can’t take a device larger than a cellphone aboard flights leaving many middle East countries:
Uh oh. I am flying United in a few weeks …
Rule 25 covers “denied boarding”, which isn’t what happened here.
Pretty sure we’re in Rule 21 territory here:
RULE 21 REFUSAL OF TRANSPORT
UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons:
< bunch of stuff which doesn’t really apply to the good doctor follows>
Whether this incident is a matter of the flight being “oversold” is an interesting question. As I understand it, the flight crew who would be taking these seats was due to a scheduling conflict/surprise/weather/maintenance or somesuch. They weren’t originally planned to be there.
I really hope this gets litigated, rather than settled.
Yeah United screwed up - they did this completely backwards! The first thing they should have done when they realized they were overbooked needed seats for their unticketed employees was violently eject one randomly chosen passenger. Then they would have gotten a lot more volunteers for $400. A lot less delay for everyone that way.
Once there on this becomes one ugly legal battle over justification, and assaulting the passenger (Who did paid the ticket and was complying with the contract) to get the seat seems to have ruined any chance for a ruling United will want. This specific scenario is not covered in the CoC.
