I agree with both of you guys...you keep sweetening the deal until people cant refuse.  That HAS to be the ONLY answer.  Dragging a guy off the plane because a computer picked him is absolutely unacceptable.  Although the guy  who got dragged and the lady in the video acted pretty ridiculous. If you are the guy who was picked, screaming like a little girl is not a good look.  And mind you, i dont think he is in the wrong at all for not getting off the plane.  I just think his reaction was silly. And he was a doctor?  hope his hands arent in charge of me if anything goes wrong on the table.  The whole situation is ridiculous. 

 

If i was traveling alone, i wouldve haggled United into a free first class international ticket. the passengers had all the leverage there, im surprised nobody took advantage of it.

 

I agree about leverage. His behavior blew the leverage he had. So many people don't act smart in that situation. Always act calm.

 

Just remind the station employees that the situation is being recorded. Now pay for my hotel and I'll be staying at an MTS approved facility, not a Super 8. Pay for my meal. Pay for my taxi if the hotel doesn't have a shuttle. Refund my travel. Free First Class International for myself and my family. If they don't like it, let them lose control.

Word to wise. When a United employee wants your seat, give it to them.

Totally disgraceful on United's part. Horrible pr both for United and the airline industry in general... Somebody's going to lose their job(s) for this, mark my words.

I don't think the passengers had much leverage because the gate agents know the airline's policy for how much they can offer. When I was working in Detroit, I would often take the Thursday 5:30pm flight from DTW to CVG, and it would almost always be overbooked. They would offer passengers $400 to volunteer, and often raise it to $600. One time the gate agent offered $800 so I volunteered. When the manager came over to issue the voucher, the employee got scolded because they're apparently not supposed to offer more than $600 for bumping off a domestic flight. So the issue here is really the corporate policy...it needs to be, keep increasing the amount until enough people volunteer.

Word to wise. When a United employee wants your seat, give it to them.

 

Why? This guy's probably going to get a big payout from United to keep quiet.

Again, deregulation.  Trump could solve this by...regulating. 

 

Regulation has plusses and minuses. In Cincy, you can certainly say goodbye to Cincinnati-Paris in a regulated environment. International routes would be assigned by demand and market size. Lots of larger markets would "need" additional service slotted for them. Cincinnati would get something like same plane service that would stop at Atlanta or Boston for a thru flight to Paris as compensation...initially.

I don't think the passengers had much leverage because the gate agents know the airline's policy for how much they can offer. When I was working in Detroit, I would often take the Thursday 5:30pm flight from DTW to CVG, and it would almost always be overbooked. They would offer passengers $400 to volunteer, and often raise it to $600. One time the gate agent offered $800 so I volunteered. When the manager came over to issue the voucher, the employee got scolded because they're apparently not supposed to offer more than $600 for bumping off a domestic flight. So the issue here is really the corporate policy...it needs to be, keep increasing the amount until enough people volunteer.

 

Right. There is a limit. I know I'm not going to get that stuff at the gate. But if the video goes viral or even if the threat is there and I'm calm and they're acting like idiots I'll get a hefty compensation when someone at the corporate offices sees what's going on.

Again, deregulation.  Trump could solve this by...regulating. 

 

Regulation has plusses and minuses. In Cincy, you can certainly say goodbye to Cincinnati-Paris in a regulated environment. International routes would be assigned by demand and market size. Lots of larger markets would "need" additional service slotted for them. Cincinnati would get something like same plane service that would stop at Atlanta or Boston as compensation...initially.

 

Due to deregulation and the subsequent rise of the hub-and-spoke model, prices are deflated in the big cities and inflated everywhere else.

 

For example, looking at Kayak right now, I could book a Mon-Thurs round trip from LA to New York for as low as $366, two weeks from now. Out of CVG, I don't think I have ever paid less than $700 for a round trip to any other city with 2 weeks notice. You can find better deals if you book further in advance but that's pretty uncommon for a lot of business travel.

 

So if we could "put the cat back in the bag" so to speak, and go back to a more regulated business model for airlines, mid-sized cities would see lower fares as well as more direct flights that didn't require a layover. I agree that we would probably lose our one remaining international flight. Detroit would probably lose many of theirs since they wouldn't be a big hub if we shifted away from a hub-and-spoke system.

I don't think the passengers had much leverage because the gate agents know the airline's policy for how much they can offer. When I was working in Detroit, I would often take the Thursday 5:30pm flight from DTW to CVG, and it would almost always be overbooked. They would offer passengers $400 to volunteer, and often raise it to $600. One time the gate agent offered $800 so I volunteered. When the manager came over to issue the voucher, the employee got scolded because they're apparently not supposed to offer more than $600 for bumping off a domestic flight. So the issue here is really the corporate policy...it needs to be, keep increasing the amount until enough people volunteer.

 

That's Delta's policy. I volunteered once at the $1200 level on an overbooked flight. Ended up getting a seat as there was another no-show passenger, though.

I don't think the passengers had much leverage because the gate agents know the airline's policy for how much they can offer. When I was working in Detroit, I would often take the Thursday 5:30pm flight from DTW to CVG, and it would almost always be overbooked. They would offer passengers $400 to volunteer, and often raise it to $600. One time the gate agent offered $800 so I volunteered. When the manager came over to issue the voucher, the employee got scolded because they're apparently not supposed to offer more than $600 for bumping off a domestic flight. So the issue here is really the corporate policy...it needs to be, keep increasing the amount until enough people volunteer.

 

That's Delta's policy. I volunteered once at the $1200 level on an overbooked flight. Ended up getting a seat as there was another no-show passenger, though.

 

The other annoying thing is that Delta doesn't allow you to combine multiple vouchers to buy a single ticket. So even though I racked up a handful of vouchers during that project by always buying a seat on that overbooked flight and then volunteering, I could only redeem one at a time. I think I got around this buy booking my next couple of vacation flights as two one-ways instead of a round trip.

Again, deregulation.  Trump could solve this by...regulating. 

 

Regulation has plusses and minuses. In Cincy, you can certainly say goodbye to Cincinnati-Paris in a regulated environment. International routes would be assigned by demand and market size. Lots of larger markets would "need" additional service slotted for them. Cincinnati would get something like same plane service that would stop at Atlanta or Boston as compensation...initially.

 

Due to deregulation and the subsequent rise of the hub-and-spoke model, prices are deflated in the big cities and inflated everywhere else.

 

For example, looking at Kayak right now, I could book a Mon-Thurs round trip from LA to New York for as low as $366, two weeks from now. Out of CVG, I don't think I have ever paid less than $700 for a round trip to any other city with 2 weeks notice. You can find better deals if you book further in advance but that's pretty uncommon for a lot of business travel.

 

So if we could "put the cat back in the bag" so to speak, and go back to a more regulated business model for airlines, mid-sized cities would see lower fares as well as more direct flights that didn't require a layover. I agree that we would probably lose our one remaining international flight. Detroit would probably lose many of theirs since they wouldn't be a big hub if we shifted away from a hub-and-spoke system.

 

I agree that the advantage would be more direct service to domestic cities. That being said fares would rise across the board even in mid-market cities.

 

That $700 ticket today was likely in the $500 range in 1970.

Again, deregulation.  Trump could solve this by...regulating. 

 

Regulation has plusses and minuses. In Cincy, you can certainly say goodbye to Cincinnati-Paris in a regulated environment. International routes would be assigned by demand and market size. Lots of larger markets would "need" additional service slotted for them. Cincinnati would get something like same plane service that would stop at Atlanta or Boston as compensation...initially.

 

Due to deregulation and the subsequent rise of the hub-and-spoke model, prices are deflated in the big cities and inflated everywhere else.

 

For example, looking at Kayak right now, I could book a Mon-Thurs round trip from LA to New York for as low as $366, two weeks from now. Out of CVG, I don't think I have ever paid less than $700 for a round trip to any other city with 2 weeks notice. You can find better deals if you book further in advance but that's pretty uncommon for a lot of business travel.

 

So if we could "put the cat back in the bag" so to speak, and go back to a more regulated business model for airlines, mid-sized cities would see lower fares as well as more direct flights that didn't require a layover. I agree that we would probably lose our one remaining international flight. Detroit would probably lose many of theirs since they wouldn't be a big hub if we shifted away from a hub-and-spoke system.

 

I remain completely unconvinced that having 20+ competing airlines is of any benefit to domestic travel in the United States.  Pretty much every other country only has one government-owned airline and they seem to be doing just fine.  Also, some countries like France and England have virtually zero domestic air travel because the rail services are so good.  That has caused all international flights to be concentrated out of London and Paris, but again, since domestic rail travel is so good, catching an international flight in Lyon or Manchester is just a 90-minute train ride away.  The TGV stops in the Charles DeGaul terminal and Crossrail 1 will create a 20-minute train ride from any London-area commuter or intercity station to Heathrow. 

 

Not hard to imagine a network of high speed trains to connect most mid-sized cities in the Midwest AND travel directly into airport terminals.  People in Nashville could do a 90-minute train ride to Atlanta's airport and Columbus and Indy and Louisville could do 60-minute rides to CVG. 

 

 

 

Again, deregulation.  Trump could solve this by...regulating. 

 

Regulation has plusses and minuses. In Cincy, you can certainly say goodbye to Cincinnati-Paris in a regulated environment. International routes would be assigned by demand and market size. Lots of larger markets would "need" additional service slotted for them. Cincinnati would get something like same plane service that would stop at Atlanta or Boston as compensation...initially.

 

Due to deregulation and the subsequent rise of the hub-and-spoke model, prices are deflated in the big cities and inflated everywhere else.

 

For example, looking at Kayak right now, I could book a Mon-Thurs round trip from LA to New York for as low as $366, two weeks from now. Out of CVG, I don't think I have ever paid less than $700 for a round trip to any other city with 2 weeks notice. You can find better deals if you book further in advance but that's pretty uncommon for a lot of business travel.

 

So if we could "put the cat back in the bag" so to speak, and go back to a more regulated business model for airlines, mid-sized cities would see lower fares as well as more direct flights that didn't require a layover. I agree that we would probably lose our one remaining international flight. Detroit would probably lose many of theirs since they wouldn't be a big hub if we shifted away from a hub-and-spoke system.

 

I remain completely unconvinced that having 20+ competing airlines is of any benefit to domestic travel in the United States.  Pretty much every other country only has one government-owned airline and they seem to be doing just fine.  Also, some countries like France and England have virtually zero domestic air travel because the rail services are so good.  That has caused all international flights to be concentrated out of London and Paris, but again, since domestic rail travel is so good, catching an international flight in Lyon or Manchester is just a 90-minute train ride away.  The TGV stops in the Charles DeGaul terminal and Crossrail 1 will create a 20-minute train ride from any London-area commuter or intercity station to Heathrow. 

 

Not hard to imagine a network of high speed trains to connect most mid-sized cities in the Midwest AND travel directly into airport terminals.  People in Nashville could do a 90-minute train ride to Atlanta's airport and Columbus and Indy and Louisville could do 60-minute rides to CVG. 

 

 

 

 

I'm not against reregulation but I think the issue is very complex. I don't have time to go over every point at this moment so just know that while US based airlines are posting record profits Euro flag carriers are getting killed between Ryanair and what's called the Middle Eastern 3: Etihad, Emirates and Qatar. Almost every country has low-cost competition and most flag carriers are not doing just fine.

I think we're in an environment where low cost carriers are becoming more and more viable. The introduction of ultra-efficient airliners like the 787 and upcoming A330neo are making long haul, low cost carriers a reality. They allow long and thin routes to be run profitably for the first time and allow LCCs to run them in trunk route service.

 

Mid size cities are more connected than ever. Moving back to a regulated air travel environment would see the end of that regional growth. It's a fine concept but in the US, we don't have major regional rail networks which could help mitigate the loss of mid size service.

The Arab airlines no doubt have an unfair advantage -- they are probably subsidized to a much greater extent, have no debt, pay their staffs peanuts, and have no legacy costs.  There is always a social cost to consumers getting what they got before for a fraction of the cost (i.e. Uber). 

 

Also, I don't like cheap vacation-oriented airfares because it works to the advantage of coastal and air-conditioned vacation destinations.  That hurts all of the traditional pre-air conditioning places like all of the state parks in the Midwest and Great Lakes.  For too many in the Midwest, "ocean = vacation". 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Arab airlines no doubt have an unfair advantage -- they are probably subsidized to a much greater extent, have no debt, pay their staffs peanuts, and have no legacy costs.  There is always a social cost to consumers getting what they got before for a fraction of the cost (i.e. Uber). 

 

 

I mean, those oil-producing city states are likely subsidizing the fuel costs for those airlines in a way British Air or Air France could never do. 

 

 

Passengers who are bumped should uniformly receive $2000 in free travel. Business or First class. No matter what.

 

I don't believe it should be a flat rate.

 

It's United's problem and they need to pay for it even if it makes the flight unprofitable. Delta recently paid a family siting in Economy $11k to get one of their crews repositioned.

 

You don't say $400 max or we call security. You up the price until you get 4 volunteers. If UA eats $10k to get there, so be it.

 

So apparently there's a federal rule that says if the airlines involuntarily bump someone, they have to pay them four times the ticket price (in cash, not vouchers), up to a total of $1,350. With that being the case, I'm not sure why United didn't keep upping the offer to $1350 hoping someone would volunteer, considering that they'd have to pay them that much anyway.

A quick article on the fuzzy math behind the rise of the Gulf state airlines:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2015/03/airline-subsidies-gulf

 

So if we really wanted to compete the U.S. government could buy out all of our airlines, give them free fuel, put aircraft wages over in some other column (pilots are now Coast Guard employees!) and have borderline slave labor at our airports. 

Hundreds of bags abandoned after thousands of Delta flight cancellations

https://www.ajc.com/travel/hundreds-bags-abandoned-after-thousands-delta-flight-cancellations/261l8dvibmp3SDfqxS3anK/

 

Passengers who are bumped should uniformly receive $2000 in free travel. Business or First class. No matter what.

 

I don't believe it should be a flat rate.

 

It's United's problem and they need to pay for it even if it makes the flight unprofitable. Delta recently paid a family siting in Economy $11k to get one of their crews repositioned.

 

You don't say $400 max or we call security. You up the price until you get 4 volunteers. If UA eats $10k to get there, so be it.

 

So apparently there's a federal rule that says if the airlines involuntarily bump someone, they have to pay them four times the ticket price (in cash, not vouchers), up to a total of $1,350. With that being the case, I'm not sure why United didn't keep upping the offer to $1350 hoping someone would volunteer, considering that they'd have to pay them that much anyway.

 

My guess is United wouldn't have paid the $1350, instead the pax "compensation" would be a seat on the next flight. 

 

BTW--as an aside, read the fine print on airline tickets and note the difference between USA passenger rights, and those from the rest of the world.  Once again our own citizens are allowed to be screwed, while passengers from the EU, etc are well-protected.

The interesting thing is that really United was not responsible for the incident other than selecting the man to be bumped. The violent part of the incident occurred with the airport security guard who was not a United employee

^ Right, it was not United employees that dragged the man off the plane, but this situation wouldn't have happened if they would've kept upping their offer until someone volunteered. I can't find it now, but in the media frenzy about the incident, someone posted an article that showed some airlines have far more involuntary bumps than others. I'm sure there are many factors, but as a general rule, if airlines are willing to offer their passengers more to volunteer, they are going to have fewer forced bumps that could result in incidents like this.

I lay the blame completely on United here.  They should've offered more money to passengers to volunteer.  Penny wise pound foolish.

The part that surprises me most is that the guy was let onto the plane and then removed. I've flown hundreds of times in my life and I've seen a lot of people bumped (and have been myself) but never have I seen someone let on the plane and then taken off. The bumping always happens at the gate, when your boarding pass is scanned. You either have a seat, or you don't. That said, I fly Delta 99% of the time and their customer service is light years ahead of United's, so maybe that's why I've never seen a circus like this.

Passengers who are bumped should uniformly receive $2000 in free travel. Business or First class. No matter what.

 

I don't believe it should be a flat rate.

 

It's United's problem and they need to pay for it even if it makes the flight unprofitable. Delta recently paid a family siting in Economy $11k to get one of their crews repositioned.

 

You don't say $400 max or we call security. You up the price until you get 4 volunteers. If UA eats $10k to get there, so be it.

 

So apparently there's a federal rule that says if the airlines involuntarily bump someone, they have to pay them four times the ticket price (in cash, not vouchers), up to a total of $1,350. With that being the case, I'm not sure why United didn't keep upping the offer to $1350 hoping someone would volunteer, considering that they'd have to pay them that much anyway.

 

Because it was a flight from Chicago to Louisville.  I bet the $800 offered was around four times the ticket price.  But of course, that's the mandatory payment.  You'd think that avoiding this spectacle might have convinced them to go above the regulatory minimum.

 

ETA: I think that $1350 cap needs to be reevaluated, especially for international flights.  The base price of some of those flights is over $1350.  That cap ought to be $5000 at least, maybe $8000 so that they only get protection from the cap if they're forced to boot you from a $2000+ flight.  And even then, I'd wonder why we prioritize protecting those monopolistic behemoths so much.  I'm guessing that regulation predates all the mergers and bankruptcies in the industry that squeezed out all the old inefficiencies and turned the airlines into profitable, if merciless, juggernauts.

I lay the blame completely on United here.  They should've offered more money to passengers to volunteer.  Penny wise pound foolish.

 

Absolutely.  And it needs to happen before the flight is completely boarded.  Bump them in the gate area and let them act out, but at least they aren't holding their ground on board.

This story keeps getting better - breaking news from England's finest publication:

 

Doctor dragged off United flight was felon who traded prescription drugs for secret gay sex with patient half his age and took them himself - and he needed anger management, was 'not forthright' and had control issues, psychiatrist found

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4401980/Dr-dragged-United-swapped-drugs-secret-gay-sex.html

 

The troubled past of the doctor who was dragged off United Airlines in an incident which has plunged the company into crisis is revealed - including his felony conviction and need for 'anger management'.

 

Dr David Dao has past of illicit gay sex with a patient, and tested positive for drugs, official documents reveal.

 

The medic, who specializes in lung disorders, was accused of refusing to give up his seat on Sunday's United Express flight UA3411 flight from Chicago to Louisville for the airline's staff.

Passengers who are bumped should uniformly receive $2000 in free travel. Business or First class. No matter what.

 

I don't believe it should be a flat rate.

 

It's United's problem and they need to pay for it even if it makes the flight unprofitable. Delta recently paid a family siting in Economy $11k to get one of their crews repositioned.

 

You don't say $400 max or we call security. You up the price until you get 4 volunteers. If UA eats $10k to get there, so be it.

 

So apparently there's a federal rule that says if the airlines involuntarily bump someone, they have to pay them four times the ticket price (in cash, not vouchers), up to a total of $1,350. With that being the case, I'm not sure why United didn't keep upping the offer to $1350 hoping someone would volunteer, considering that they'd have to pay them that much anyway.

 

Because it was a flight from Chicago to Louisville.  I bet the $800 offered was around four times the ticket price.  But of course, that's the mandatory payment.  You'd think that avoiding this spectacle might have convinced them to go above the regulatory minimum.

 

ETA: I think that $1350 cap needs to be reevaluated, especially for international flights.  The base price of some of those flights is over $1350.  That cap ought to be $5000 at least, maybe $8000 so that they only get protection from the cap if they're forced to boot you from a $2000+ flight.  And even then, I'd wonder why we prioritize protecting those monopolistic behemoths so much.  I'm guessing that regulation predates all the mergers and bankruptcies in the industry that squeezed out all the old inefficiencies and turned the airlines into profitable, if merciless, juggernauts.

 

You can raise the limit but it's rarer to have this situation on an international flight. It's a lot more common to see someone get screwed going to Louisville than London because of crew bases, frequency and aircraft size.

This story keeps getting better - breaking news from England's finest publication:

 

Doctor dragged off United flight was felon who traded prescription drugs for secret gay sex with patient half his age and took them himself - and he needed anger management, was 'not forthright' and had control issues, psychiatrist found

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4401980/Dr-dragged-United-swapped-drugs-secret-gay-sex.html

 

The troubled past of the doctor who was dragged off United Airlines in an incident which has plunged the company into crisis is revealed - including his felony conviction and need for 'anger management'.

 

Dr David Dao has past of illicit gay sex with a patient, and tested positive for drugs, official documents reveal.

 

The medic, who specializes in lung disorders, was accused of refusing to give up his seat on Sunday's United Express flight UA3411 flight from Chicago to Louisville for the airline's staff.

 

Are we doing oppo research on private individuals now.  This is a new low even for Ram.

^ I can assure you that I do not work for the Daily Mail, and did not do any of that research.

^ You are actively sharing and amplifying the message. 

^ You are actively sharing and amplifying the message. 

 

It is valid, given the doctor's response in the video (I still think United made a grave mistake on this one however).

The character of this guy is definitely relevant in terms of sympathy; what a wacko.

^ The private citizen's past is not important for public interest.  United were poor actors here and they should learn from this.  I despise when private citizens have their name dragged through the mud.  This man did nothing wrong.

The interesting thing is that really United was not responsible for the incident other than selecting the man to be bumped. The violent part of the incident occurred with the airport security guard who was not a United employee

 

In this situation, it makes me hate hyperaggresive meatheads much more than some faceless corporation that improperly coordinated an impromptu reverse auction. My patience for this type of male gets more minuscule by the day.

LOL, I can't believe that people are now trying to drag this guy through the mud. I guess in America we give everyone a purity test. If someone is the victim of a crime or some other injustice, we search their past for any bad thing they have have done. And if we find something bad, we just say, well, they deserved it.

 

God forbid anything bad ever happen to you, Ram23[/member], and then we find out that you don't have a squeaky clean history.

I guess in America we give everyone a purity test.

 

The Daily Mail is from the UK and they are undeniably the best at what they do (though Heavy.com has been gaining on them recently). Blame the Brits, not us.

 

That said, I don't think anyone is looking at this guys background and making the assumption that he deserved to be dragged off that plane (I know I'm not). It is possible to simultaneously believe that United/airport security should have handled things differently, and that this guy has quite an interesting background. I'm mostly interested in the absurdity of the entire story. Did you know that the guy is also a successful semi-professional poker player? If only he would have played is cards differently on that fateful day in Chicago none of this would be newsworthy...

There is nothing wrong with investigating the guy's background, especially as it has some (limited) bearing on what happened and the amount of sympathy warranted. He's become a bit of a public figure, and his criminal and unethical behavior is of public interest. He isn't some innocent, and his indiscretions/crimes/psychopathic behaviors are compelling and newsworthy. The fact that this guy still has a medical license is baffling and probably warrants a whole other discussion.

Passengers who are bumped should uniformly receive $2000 in free travel. Business or First class. No matter what.

 

I don't believe it should be a flat rate.

 

It's United's problem and they need to pay for it even if it makes the flight unprofitable. Delta recently paid a family siting in Economy $11k to get one of their crews repositioned.

 

You don't say $400 max or we call security. You up the price until you get 4 volunteers. If UA eats $10k to get there, so be it.

 

So apparently there's a federal rule that says if the airlines involuntarily bump someone, they have to pay them four times the ticket price (in cash, not vouchers), up to a total of $1,350. With that being the case, I'm not sure why United didn't keep upping the offer to $1350 hoping someone would volunteer, considering that they'd have to pay them that much anyway.

 

Because it was a flight from Chicago to Louisville.  I bet the $800 offered was around four times the ticket price.  But of course, that's the mandatory payment.  You'd think that avoiding this spectacle might have convinced them to go above the regulatory minimum.

 

ETA: I think that $1350 cap needs to be reevaluated, especially for international flights.  The base price of some of those flights is over $1350.  That cap ought to be $5000 at least, maybe $8000 so that they only get protection from the cap if they're forced to boot you from a $2000+ flight.  And even then, I'd wonder why we prioritize protecting those monopolistic behemoths so much.  I'm guessing that regulation predates all the mergers and bankruptcies in the industry that squeezed out all the old inefficiencies and turned the airlines into profitable, if merciless, juggernauts.

 

You can raise the limit but it's rarer to have this situation on an international flight. It's a lot more common to see someone get screwed going to Louisville than London because of crew bases, frequency and aircraft size.

 

I should hope so.  But also good to know.  I hope you're right about that.

And that character discussion is fine for an Internet message board, I guess, but this is a case study in why the legal system is reticent to allow character evidence in courtrooms, as well as the closely-related category of evidence of previous convictions.  Unless his previous violations of medical ethics and drug laws are relevant to the incident in question, they shouldn't affect the perception of whether United was justified in forcing him off the plane.  I don't see it here.  The issue here is United's contract of carriage (which goes along with the ticket), its conduct in the enforcement of that contract (which is a slightly different issue than the legal rights of the parties under the contract itself), its regulatory obligations, and of course its public relations department (up to and including the CEO).

Passengers who are bumped should uniformly receive $2000 in free travel. Business or First class. No matter what.

 

I don't believe it should be a flat rate.

 

It's United's problem and they need to pay for it even if it makes the flight unprofitable. Delta recently paid a family siting in Economy $11k to get one of their crews repositioned.

 

You don't say $400 max or we call security. You up the price until you get 4 volunteers. If UA eats $10k to get there, so be it.

 

So apparently there's a federal rule that says if the airlines involuntarily bump someone, they have to pay them four times the ticket price (in cash, not vouchers), up to a total of $1,350. With that being the case, I'm not sure why United didn't keep upping the offer to $1350 hoping someone would volunteer, considering that they'd have to pay them that much anyway.

 

Because it was a flight from Chicago to Louisville.  I bet the $800 offered was around four times the ticket price.  But of course, that's the mandatory payment.  You'd think that avoiding this spectacle might have convinced them to go above the regulatory minimum.

 

ETA: I think that $1350 cap needs to be reevaluated, especially for international flights.  The base price of some of those flights is over $1350.  That cap ought to be $5000 at least, maybe $8000 so that they only get protection from the cap if they're forced to boot you from a $2000+ flight.  And even then, I'd wonder why we prioritize protecting those monopolistic behemoths so much.  I'm guessing that regulation predates all the mergers and bankruptcies in the industry that squeezed out all the old inefficiencies and turned the airlines into profitable, if merciless, juggernauts.

 

You can raise the limit but it's rarer to have this situation on an international flight. It's a lot more common to see someone get screwed going to Louisville than London because of crew bases, frequency and aircraft size.

 

I should hope so.  But also good to know.  I hope you're right about that.

 

Never say never but it's rare. International flight crews are generally around 8-15 people depending on airline and aircraft size. If they bumped that many people out of economy and had to compensate with hotels/meals + compensation it makes the flight less profitable.

 

Plus with crew rest issues international crews usually have a schedule where they're not deadheading that much. They'll fly Chicago-Paris take the day off then fly Paris-Chicago a day or two later. Typically an American based crew doesn't start in Paris but there are plenty of times where a Chicago based regional jet crew will need to be in Louisville, Columbus, Kansas City, etc. to start their shift.

Then there's this:

http://gizmodo.com/united-loses-800-million-in-value-after-passenger-drag-1794208511

Then there's this:

http://gizmodo.com/united-loses-800-million-in-value-after-passenger-drag-1794208511

 

Their stock dropped fast this morning and then creeped back up all day. It is still down a bit day to day but this morning around 10:00 would have been a good time to buy up a bunch of stock on the cheap. This was one of the quickest social media PR disaster recoveries I think I've ever seen. Usually this kind of thing lasts a few days or so, but this one was only about two hours long.

Yeah, VW stock is doing just fine after their scandal.  Who are all these fools selling off huge chunks of these companies whenever a frivolous scandal makes the news?

Stock market is very fickle day to day.  I am invested for the long term so I disregard the noise.

Love the memes on this incident. One of my faves...

 

Interesting.

 

https://thepilotwifelife.wordpress.com/2017/04/11/i-know-youre-mad-at-united-but-thoughts-from-a-pilot-wife-about-flight-3411/

 

Seems like we need to be complaining to Congress, not United.

Complain about what, though?

 

I think this article sums up the situation well:

 

http://viewfromthewing.boardingarea.com/2017/04/11/real-reason-man-dragged-off-united-flight-stop-happening/

 

Fault here lies with:

 

United for not having as many seats as they sold, although it wasn’t because they sold more seats than the plane held, it was because their operation became a mess and they needed to salvage that to inconvenience the fewest passengers overall. It wasn’t “to maximize their profits” although they certainly wanted to limit their losses by limiting passenger inconvenience.

 

The passenger who should have gotten off the plane when ordered to do so. It sucked for him and wasn’t his fault, but refusing airline and police instructions unless designed to provoke a violent response for media attention to promote a civil rights cause is a bad idea.

 

The Chicago Aviation Police shouldn’t have responded with the force they did. They’re the most to blame. If they hadn’t used as much force this whole thing would never even have been a story.

 

Really the only issue here, IMO, is that the police shouldn't have been so rough with the guy. Even if someone is resisting, if they aren't actually a real threat it should be possible to get them into cuffs and off of an airplane without bloodying them up.

Interesting.

 

https://thepilotwifelife.wordpress.com/2017/04/11/i-know-youre-mad-at-united-but-thoughts-from-a-pilot-wife-about-flight-3411/

 

Seems like we need to be complaining to Congress, not United.

 

Yeah, as if this Congress, which takes its orders from the oligarchy, will listen to the people who fly commercial aviation....

.

Complain about what, though?

 

I think this article sums up the situation well:

 

http://viewfromthewing.boardingarea.com/2017/04/11/real-reason-man-dragged-off-united-flight-stop-happening/

 

Fault here lies with:

 

United for not having as many seats as they sold, although it wasn’t because they sold more seats than the plane held, it was because their operation became a mess and they needed to salvage that to inconvenience the fewest passengers overall. It wasn’t “to maximize their profits” although they certainly wanted to limit their losses by limiting passenger inconvenience.

 

The passenger who should have gotten off the plane when ordered to do so. It sucked for him and wasn’t his fault, but refusing airline and police instructions unless designed to provoke a violent response for media attention to promote a civil rights cause is a bad idea.

 

The Chicago Aviation Police shouldn’t have responded with the force they did. They’re the most to blame. If they hadn’t used as much force this whole thing would never even have been a story.

 

Really the only issue here, IMO, is that the police shouldn't have been so rough with the guy. Even if someone is resisting, if they aren't actually a real threat it should be possible to get them into cuffs and off of an airplane without bloodying them up.

 

 

True dat. Meatheads beating up doctors is not where we need to be as a society.