United employees will start bumping paid passengers before they take a seat


#1

Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2017/04/17/united-employees-will-start-bu.html


#2

“Security Threat” being defined by the people with the vested interest in stealing the seat you paid for.


#3

“United Airlines employees are no longer allowed to forcibly remove seated passengers to swipe their seat”

Well considering i never fly United i wonder if they can forcibly place customers onto their planes.


#4

If they keep this up, they’re going to have to, just get people to use their airline - after paying them in advance, natch. Or something of that ilk.


#5

Hmm. Up to $10,000. This could make things interesting. As the offer creeps higher more people will start to consider it but naturally they will want to wait as long as possible to try to maximize their reward. But if they wait too long another passenger could beat them to it. So it becomes a game of poker, with all interested parties carefully monitoring each other for signs of giving in so they can be the first to blurt out “ME! ME! I claim the prize!” as they rush the counter.

Then once the adrenaline subsides they realize just how fucked they are that they missed this flight.


#6

little too little, maybe a little too late.


#7

"United Airlines employees are no longer allowed to forcibly remove seated passengers to swipe their seat. "

I had the assumption they weren’t really allowed to do this before the incident either. So United is just asking their employees to no longer break regulations. This verbiage feels like an example of the corporate speak article posted from last week.


#8

Stupid corporate just doesn’t get it. People want respect.


#9

So what is it exactly you are complaining about?
Corporations behaving like corporations?
Or behaving along the lines of the contracts and the guidelines/laws governing the contract, while actually promising to be less of an ass about it?
What about the part where they promise to not abuse (for this particular scenario) the power to call in law enforcement.
Or are we just back to the point of corporations are evil, politicians are crooked and the media is corrupt/lying? Because if that is the case, I am fine with that, but say it straight, don’t talk around it…


#10

Indeed. The CEO of United implied David Dao was a security threat before independent passenger video proved otherwise. I doubt anything has really changed here.


#11

The twist is that United subcontracts this route to a third party (Republic Airways)


#12

Yeah, way to attack the problem there United.


#13

Nice! More layers of responsibility deflecting arrangements!


#14

If you are a paying customer for a service or product…you don’t WANT respect. YOU GET RESPECT by the virtue of being the customer. period. end of story.

This is what United is not understanding.


#15

Seems like the attitude (if not the policy) is that if you do not comply with the instructions of a flight attendant, you are by definition a security threat. Seems like they need to stop dressing stewards in skirts and pantsuits and start dressing them like SWAT team;


#16

Oh good, they’re finally going to follow the pre-existing regulations! :expressionless:


#17

Kudos to United for their new airline food choice: Takeout Chinese


#18

I have no problems with their new policy. If they had done that instead of what they did, there’d be no issue. Weren’t they ALREADY bumping passengers before they took their seats?


#19

My complaint is that your complaint that I was complaining is not valid because I wasn’t complaining.


#20

Yeah, I guess I can see how that could be a problem…