Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Rule #1 of flying: the pilot is god. God may decide for any reason that you are not welcome on the plane, and that is the end of the discussion. Fairness, how important it is that you get to your destination, none of those things matter. God has spoken, and so it shall be. If you refuse to leave you forfeit the right to complain when the police remove you.

 Peregrine wrote:
Rule #1 of flying: the pilot is god. God may decide for any reason that you are not welcome on the plane, and that is the end of the discussion. Fairness, how important it is that you get to your destination, none of those things matter. God has spoken, and so it shall be. If you refuse to leave you forfeit the right to complain when the police remove you.

I thought you were god, Peregrine, or are you trying to say that you are a pilot?

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
I thought you were god, Peregrine, or are you trying to say that you are a pilot?

I am a pilot, which makes me god on both counts.

What peregrine said.

That's the short of it...

... I'm not sure that $800 is "the max by law" in compensation... maybe monetarily... but I'm sure they could offer other things to recompense.

I'd take the $800 + free ticket... that's a good start for a new 40k army!

 whembly wrote:
What peregrine said.

That's the short of it...

... I'm not sure that $800 is "the max by law" in compensation... maybe monetarily... but I'm sure they could offer other things to recompense.

I'd take the $800 + free ticket... that's a good start for a new 40k army!

Business class at least. I want legroom!

I was under the impression it was $800 + hotel room + flight out the next day.

Already seeing some in other places playing up the racial element saying if he hadn't been Asian it would never had happened so now we get that excitement to go with all this as well.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Rule #1 of flying: the pilot is god. God may decide for any reason that you are not welcome on the plane, and that is the end of the discussion. Fairness, how important it is that you get to your destination, none of those things matter. God has spoken, and so it shall be. If you refuse to leave you forfeit the right to complain when the police remove you.

I thought you were god, Peregrine, or are you trying to say that you are a pilot?

Well it kind of relates to face some class it a "ship" and a captain word is rule at sea/in the air I guess.
Thrbuse of Captain, or a term that defines a senior navel officer with authority over there vessel while it is in transit.

Ie the senior navel officer regardless if below is the vessels Captain.

 Ahtman wrote:
I was under the impression it was $800 + hotel room + flight out the next day.

Already seeing some in other places playing up the racial element saying if he hadn't been Asian it would never had happened so now we get that excitement to go with all this as well.

From the CNN article on how they pick Involunteers:

"The system in place enables us to take a look at how long a customer will need to stay at an airport, for example," Hobart said. "We also keep unaccompanied minors, we try to keep families together, we take a lot of factors into consideration."

United employees explained the situation to the man several times, but he still refused, Hobart said. Authorities came in and forcibly removed him from the plane.

 Ahtman wrote:
I was under the impression it was $800 + hotel room + flight out the next day.

Already seeing some in other places playing up the racial element saying if he hadn't been Asian it would never had happened so now we get that excitement to go with all this as well.

Oh yea, United vs. violations of Federal Law based on the Constitution. Go go 14th Amendment!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
MSNBC now saying:

*one of the officers now suspended by an airport.
*CEO now in trouble for his tweet.

 Peregrine wrote:
Rule #1 of flying: the pilot is god. God may decide for any reason that you are not welcome on the plane, and that is the end of the discussion. Fairness, how important it is that you get to your destination, none of those things matter. God has spoken, and so it shall be. If you refuse to leave you forfeit the right to complain when the police remove you.

Bollocks to that.

As a paying passenger, you're their solely to get me from A-B as agreed and paid for.

Try to force me off the flight for no reason other than 'our staff want your seat' and there's going to be issues.

Hope this airline enjoy their lawsuit.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
As a paying passenger, you're their solely to get me from A-B as agreed and paid for.

You do know that as a paying passenger part of your payment is an agreement to the rules and regulations of both the company as well as State and Federal Law. Just saying "I bought a ticket" is like telling a cop you pay his salary because you pay taxes when he pulls you over for speeding. I'm not saying the situation was well handled but the idea that one buying a ticket gives them carte blanche doesn't really work either.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Rule #1 of flying: the pilot is god. God may decide for any reason that you are not welcome on the plane, and that is the end of the discussion. Fairness, how important it is that you get to your destination, none of those things matter. God has spoken, and so it shall be. If you refuse to leave you forfeit the right to complain when the police remove you.

Bollocks to that.

As a paying passenger, you're their solely to get me from A-B as agreed and paid for.

Try to force me off the flight for no reason other than 'our staff want your seat' and there's going to be issues.

Hope this airline enjoy their lawsuit.

Make sure to read the fine print on your ticket agreement before you incur your federal offense and get added to the No Fly list...

So because pilots are having a wee ego-spank, it's ok to physically drag passengers around? Because the airline wants to shift non-paying staff somewhere else?

Bollocks that's on the small print.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
As a paying passenger, you're their solely to get me from A-B as agreed and paid for.

Nope. As the pilot I am God, at least in My domain of that particular aircraft. My word is absolute law*, if I say you get off My plane then you are removed. If I say the plane doesn't fly then it stays right where it is until I am satisfied. Don't like it? Too damn bad. Because the other side of that power is that I have full responsibility for anything that goes wrong.

*Quite literally so, in many cases. In an emergency, where emergency is defined as "I think there is one", I have permission to break any law or FAA regulation if I consider it necessary to ensure the safe conclusion of the flight.

Try to force me off the flight for no reason other than 'our staff want your seat' and there's going to be issues.

You are correct, there are going to be issues when airport security comes to remove you. You may end up in jail if you insist on continuing to resist the decision to remove you.

Also, you seem to be under the impression that I need a reason to remove you. I don't. My word is law. The airline may be required to compensate you (with the amount of compensation set by law), depending on the circumstances, but once the decision to remove you is made you're off the plane.

Hope this airline enjoy their lawsuit.

While they'll probably settle out of court to save on lawyer fees and bad PR, the lawsuit is a joke. The airline has clear legal authority to remove a passenger, and resisting airport security means accepting the painful consequences.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So because pilots are having a wee ego-spank, it's ok to physically drag passengers around? Because the airline wants to shift non-paying staff somewhere else?

Bollocks that's on the small print.

What do you think is going to happen when you resist the police? Especially airport security, of all police? The passenger was given the opportunity to obey the law and leave voluntarily. Only when they refuse to obey the police did the police use force to remove the passenger.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Rule #1 of flying: the pilot is god. God may decide for any reason that you are not welcome on the plane, and that is the end of the discussion. Fairness, how important it is that you get to your destination, none of those things matter. God has spoken, and so it shall be. If you refuse to leave you forfeit the right to complain when the police remove you.

Bollocks to that.

As a paying passenger, you're their solely to get me from A-B as agreed and paid for.

Try to force me off the flight for no reason other than 'our staff want your seat' and there's going to be issues.

Your failure to read the Contract of Carriage is not the problem of the Airline, it's yours. They have the ability to kick you off the plane for any number of reasons, and if your response is going to be "issues" then law enforcement will take care of those "issues" (aka: you).

Speaking of Contract of Carriage:

Rule 5

G: All of UA’s flights are subject to overbooking which could result in UA’s inability to provide previously confirmed reserved space for a given flight or for the class of service reserved. In that event, UA’s obligation to the Passenger is governed by Rule 25.

Rule 25

A: Denied Boarding (U.S.A./Canadian Flight Origin) - When there is an Oversold UA flight that originates in the U.S.A. or Canada, the following provisions apply:

1. Request for Volunteers

UA will request Passengers who are willing to relinquish their confirmed reserved space in exchange for compensation in an amount determined by UA (including but not limited to check or an electronic travel certificate). The travel certificate will be valid only for travel on UA or designated Codeshare partners for one year from the date of issue and will have no refund value. If a Passenger is asked to volunteer, UA will not later deny boarding to that Passenger involuntarily unless that Passenger was informed at the time he was asked to volunteer that there was a possibility of being denied boarding involuntarily and of the amount of compensation to which he/she would have been entitled in that event. The request for volunteers and the selection of such person to be denied space will be in a manner determined solely by UA.

2: 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:

a. Passengers who are Qualified Individuals with Disabilities, unaccompanied minors under the age of 18 years, or minors between the ages of 5 to 15 years who use the unaccompanied minor service, will be the last to be involuntarily denied boarding if it is determined by UA that such denial would constitute a hardship.

b. The priority of all other confirmed passengers may be determined based on a passenger’s fare class, itinerary, status of frequent flyer program membership, and the time in which the passenger presents him/herself for check-in without advanced seat assignment.

3. Transportation for Passengers Denied Boarding - When UA is unable to provide previously confirmed space due to an Oversold flight, UA will provide transportation to such Passengers who have been denied boarding whether voluntarily or involuntarily in accordance with the provisions below.

a. UA will transport the Passenger on its own flight to the Destination without Stopover on its next flight on which space is available at no additional cost to the Passenger, regardless of class of service.

b. If space is available on another Carrier’s flight regardless of class of service, such flights may be used upon United’s sole discretion and the Passenger’s request at no additional cost to the Passenger only if such flight provides an earlier arrival than the UA flight offered in 3) a) above.

4. Compensation for Passengers Denied Boarding Involuntarily

a. For passengers traveling in interstate transportation between points within the United States, subject to the EXCEPTIONS in section d) below, UA shall pay compensation to Passengers denied boarding involuntarily from an Oversold Flight at the rate of 200% of the fare to the Passenger’s first Stopover or, if none, Destination, with a maximum of 675 USD if UA offers Alternate Transportation that, at the time the arrangement is made, is planned to arrive at the Passenger’s Destination or first Stopover more than one hour but less than two hours after the planned arrival time of the Passenger’s original flight. If UA offers Alternate Transportation that, at the time the arrangement is made, is planned to arrive at the Passenger’s Destination or first Stopover more than two hours after the planned arrival time of the Passenger’s original flight, UA shall pay compensation to Passengers denied boarding involuntarily from an Oversold Flight at the rate of 400% of the fare to the Passenger’s first Stopover or, if none, Destination with a maximum of 1350 USD.

How is it a joke?

Passenger is asked to give up his seat.

Passenger declines, explaining he's a Doctor, and must be on that flight to make his next appointments.

Airline has him physically assaulted, all on film, including images of the guy bleeding.

Do remind to never your unfriendly skies, yeah? I don't even know how you can begin to defend that behaviour.

And no 'I am God, honest guy, I'm ever so special' doesn't cut it.

I really hope that passenger doesn't settle out of court,

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So because pilots are having a wee ego-spank, it's ok to physically drag passengers around? Because the airline wants to shift non-paying staff somewhere else?

Bollocks that's on the small print.

No, it's okay for police to physically drag a passenger around when that passenger refuses to comply with the contract he signed and get off the overbooked plane to get rerouted.

On that small print.

Does it give a definition of 'Boarding'?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So because pilots are having a wee ego-spank, it's ok to physically drag passengers around? Because the airline wants to shift non-paying staff somewhere else?

Bollocks that's on the small print.

Lets take the pilots out of it. They weren't the ones pulling people off the plane. Pilots aren't the guys handling the ticketing and boarding. They're the guys harrassing the stewardesses.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
As a paying passenger, you're their solely to get me from A-B as agreed and paid for.

Nope. As the pilot I am God, at least in My domain of that particular aircraft. My word is absolute law*, if I say you get off My plane then you are removed. If I say the plane doesn't fly then it stays right where it is until I am satisfied. Don't like it? Too damn bad. Because the other side of that power is that I have full responsibility for anything that goes wrong.

*Quite literally so, in many cases. In an emergency, where emergency is defined as "I think there is one", I have permission to break any law or FAA regulation if I consider it necessary to ensure the safe conclusion of the flight.

Try to force me off the flight for no reason other than 'our staff want your seat' and there's going to be issues.

You are correct, there are going to be issues when airport security comes to remove you. You may end up in jail if you insist on continuing to resist the decision to remove you.

Also, you seem to be under the impression that I need a reason to remove you. I don't. My word is law. The airline may be required to compensate you (with the amount of compensation set by law), depending on the circumstances, but once the decision to remove you is made you're off the plane.

Hope this airline enjoy their lawsuit.

While they'll probably settle out of court to save on lawyer fees and bad PR, the lawsuit is a joke. The airline has clear legal authority to remove a passenger, and resisting airport security means accepting the painful consequences.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So because pilots are having a wee ego-spank, it's ok to physically drag passengers around? Because the airline wants to shift non-paying staff somewhere else?

Bollocks that's on the small print.

What do you think is going to happen when you resist the police? Especially airport security, of all police? The passenger was given the opportunity to obey the law and leave voluntarily. Only when they refuse to obey the police did the police use force to remove the passenger.

However blunt. A navel or air captain is law on there own "ship" whilst underway in effect.
Yes bound by rules but there empowered to ensure safe arivial of "ship" , crew, cargo,and such. However are also ones who are liable should this duty be failed.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
As a paying passenger, you're their solely to get me from A-B as agreed and paid for.

You do know that as a paying passenger part of your payment is an agreement to the rules and regulations of both the company as well as State and Federal Law. Just saying "I bought a ticket" is like telling a cop you pay his salary because you pay taxes when he pulls you over for speeding. I'm not saying the situation was well handled but the idea that one buying a ticket gives them carte blanche doesn't really work either.

That however does not remove them from liability in how they treat their clients.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
How is it a joke?

Passenger is asked to give up his seat.

Passenger declines, explaining he's a Doctor, and must be on that flight to make his next appointments.

Airline has him physically assaulted, all on film, including images of the guy bleeding.

Do remind to never your unfriendly skies, yeah? I don't even know how you can begin to defend that behaviour.

And no 'I am God, honest guy, I'm ever so special' doesn't cut it.

I really hope that passenger doesn't settle out of court,

And here's the lawsuit. The airlines created the situation due to their own negligence in overboarding the plane. INstead of working with their ticketees they created a situation in which one of their clients was physically battered and suffered injuries and mental scars for the rest of his life. This is supported by the evidence that one of the officers has now been suspended.

Is $10 a day too much to compensate him for the mental scars, negative publicity, and harm this caused to him and his family? Now pay up!

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
How is it a joke?

The joke is that your list skipped a few steps. I added the correct information in italics to preserve the quotes where appropriate.

Step 1: Passenger books a flight and agrees that if the flight is overbooked he may be involuntarily be denied a seat and will be given an alternative seat with appropriate compensation if so requires.

Step 2: Passenger shows up to overbooked flight.

Step 3:Passenger and all other passengersis asked to volunteer togive up his seat.

Step 4: Passenger declines, explaining he's a Doctor, and must be on that flight to make his next appointments.

Step 5: Nobody volunteers and passengers are selected for involuntary denials of boarding. Doctor is one of them.

Step 6: Doctor decided the contract he agreed to doesn't apply to him and refuses to comply with the order to disembark the aircraft in accordance with the Contract of Carriage.

Step 7: Airline notified law enforcement that a passenger is not complying with the request, preventing the airplane from taxing and interfering with the operation of an aircraft.

Step 8: Law Enforcement tells him to get off the plane.

Step 9: Doctor refuses.

Airline has him physically assaulted, all on film, including images of the guy bleeding.

Peregrine doesn't agree with me on pretty much anything, but I think even he might agree that despite his power as Sky God of the Metal Flying Tube he doesn't have the power to point at a guy and tell the cops "Your Sky God orders you to kick his ass, make him bleed, and make sure the cameras get a good look so that other my respect my authority in the future."

Step 10: Police gain compliance with their order.

Do remind to never your unfriendly skies, yeah? I don't even know how you can begin to defend that behaviour.

And no 'I am God, honest guy, I'm ever so special' doesn't cut it.

I really hope that passenger doesn't settle out of court,

Honestly, by refusing to honor the Contract of Carriage when he caused a scene instead of getting off the plane he let United off the hook. They were no longer legally responsible for any compensation nor to get him to his destination.

That's also in the Contract of Carriage, by the way.

Further thoughts on those T&C's (see, professionally I'm an Investigator with an Inquisitorial Mandate, so I'm used to reading contracts and that)....

First is above - do the T&C's have a glossary of terms?

If not, a seated passenger being removed is not stopping them from Boarding (see the dictionary definition).

And as for overbooking - domthe T&C's define Passenger? Because he was forced to give up his seat for Staff - those are two different things, no?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Passenger declines, explaining he's a Doctor, and must be on that flight to make his next appointments.

Everyone wants to be on the plane, that's why they didn't volunteer. But "I really don't want to miss this flight" is not a legal claim to staying. The airline can remove you no matter how much you want to keep your schedule. The airline can obviously consider the circumstances and voluntarily allow you to stay, but they have no legal obligation to do so. This is clearly explained in the terms of service you agree to when buying a ticket, and a well established fact of law.

Airline has him physically assaulted, all on film, including images of the guy bleeding.

No, the airline did not "have him physically assaulted" like it was some kind of vengeance. That would be a crime. What actually happened is that the police told him to leave, he refused to obey the police, and the police removed him by force. Resisting police instructions is a bad idea if you don't want to get hurt.

And no 'I am God, honest guy, I'm ever so special' doesn't cut it.

Too bad, because that's how the law works.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Further thoughts on those T&C's (see, professionally I'm an Investigator with an Inquisitorial Mandate, so I'm used to reading contracts and that)....

First is above - do the T&C's have a glossary of terms?

I don't know. I used the magic of google to find the contract of carriage, maybe you can use the magic of google to answer your question?

If not, a seated passenger being removed is not stopping them from Boarding (see the dictionary definition).

And as for overbooking - domthe T&C's define Passenger? Because he was forced to give up his seat for Staff - those are two different things, no?

Those are great questions to look up on your phone as you are sitting on the airport, money in your pocket for being denied boarding, while waiting on your free-of-charge new flight, when you prepare to see if you are entitled to additional damages or compensation for being denied boarding in violation of the contract of carriage.

They are not great questions to ask while are interfering with the operation of an aircraft and physically fighting with police officers.

Arguing and fighting with the aircraft crew is like arguing and fighting with the cops. It doesn't matter how wrong they are, at that point they have the power. You shut up, comply, and count your paychecks for every violation. You can get rid of an illegal arrest, you can't get rid of an assault of a police officer charge. You can sue for being denied boarding in violation of your contract, you can't sue for interfering with the operation of an aircraft and physically fighting police officers.

Well in the discovery phase it will be interesting to see why an ethnic minority was picked out.

United will settle this within 48 hours. The CEO is now getting flack over his stupid ass tweet.

Looking pretty boned on the Contract of Carriage....

Overbooking onlyapplies to Passengers...

UA define Passengers as...any person except members of the crew (emphasis mine) carried or holding a confirmed reservation to be carried on the aircraft with the consent of the carrier.

Contact of Carriage doesn't seem to allow UA to hoy passengers off to make space for crew. A term which itself isn't defined in the T&C's.

So not only had they allowed this poor sod to board already, thus removing their right to refuse boarding (boarding not being defined, you'd go with the generally accepted term - and that's not 'already seated on the plane'), but their own Contract doesn't allow to remove passengers in favour of crew.

Whoopsadaisy...

 Frazzled wrote:
Well in the discovery phase it will be interesting to see why an ethnic minority was picked out.

Hypothetical answer:

We looked at the itinerary of all passengers: we were able to re-book this passenger to get him to his destination with the shortest delay out of all the passengers on that plane. Deboarding anyone other than those four passengers would have resulted in longer delays for the passengers that would have been picked. In compliance with our policies, and the contract the passenger agreed to, he was picked because he was not a frequent flier, on the cheapest fare, and our ability to get him to his destination with only a minimal delay.

United will settle this within 48 hours. The CEO is now getting flack over his stupid ass tweet.

Probably. But the public is stupid and it's often better to settle an issue where you did nothing wrong just to get people to shut up.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Looking pretty boned on the Contract of Carriage....

Overbooking onlyapplies to Passengers...

UA define Passengers as...any person except members of the crew (emphasis mine) carried or holding a confirmed reservation to be carried on the aircraft with the consent of the carrier.

Contact of Carriage doesn't seem to allow UA to hoy passengers off to make space for crew. A term which itself isn't defined in the T&C's.

So not only had they allowed this poor sod to board already, thus removing their right to refuse boarding (boarding not being defined, you'd go with the generally accepted term - and that's not 'already seated on the plane'), but their own Contract doesn't allow to remove passengers in favour of crew.

Whoopsadaisy...

Again, none of this matters. The pilot's word is law, period. If the pilot (whether on their own initiative or approving a request made by their employer) says "this person is getting off the plane" then that's the end of the discussion. The person is leaving, whether they leave voluntarily or are physically removed by the police. The passenger may be entitled to compensation for being moved to a different flight, and may be able to sue the airline for breach of contract or similar, but they are getting off the plane. No amount of "but you can't do this to me" or "I'm a really important person with really important places to be" will change this fact. And if you're dumb enough to resist the police in the process, well, you get what you ask for.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Looking pretty boned on the Contract of Carriage....

Overbooking onlyapplies to Passengers...

UA define Passengers as...any person except members of the crew (emphasis mine) carried or holding a confirmed reservation to be carried on the aircraft with the consent of the carrier.

Contact of Carriage doesn't seem to allow UA to hoy passengers off to make space for crew. A term which itself isn't defined in the T&C's.

So not only had they allowed this poor sod to board already, thus removing their right to refuse boarding (boarding not being defined, you'd go with the generally accepted term - and that's not 'already seated on the plane'), but their own Contract doesn't allow to remove passengers in favour of crew.

Whoopsadaisy...

The contract doesn't apply once he decided to interfere with the operation of an aircraft and fight police.

Again: the time to fight a contract violation is after the fact. The time to comply with police orders is when the police gives them.

The American Legal System: "Sue tomorrow, don't get your ass beat today."