Passengers ‘shaky and so disgusted’ as United forces screaming doctor off a plane

[mystery-ak]

That will be the next thing.  Take away all the phones and laptops- so the 'official' version is the only version.

Rush ought to be careful about condemning drug users 'at altitude'

Perhaps his flight 'privileges' are next.

Rush has his own plane..

[LonestarDream]

Rush has his own plane..

THAT is an UBER privilege .   Should his plane 'malfunction' , then others could be harmed.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Anti- Trust .

I'm guessing here that you're not all that familiar with antitrust law, and how it is enforced....

Yes @AbaraXas , this scenario has activated my libertarian DNA.

Libertarians generally believe in the sanctity of private contracts.  This doctor chose to violate his end of it.

[LonestarDream]

I'm guessing here that you're not all that familiar with antitrust law, and how it is enforced....

Libertarians generally believe in the sanctity of private contracts.  This doctor chose to violate his end of it.

It is very simple.  United/Continental/ABCEFG....

Break it up.  Reverse the consolidation that has been going on the industry.

[Cyber Liberty]

Rush has his own plane..

True enough.  The cops were fine with waiting for him on the ground.

[thackney]

So you are on a business trip from Houston to Dallas, sit at the gate 2 hours, and miss that meeting?  Not so sure about that.

I feel rather confident​ in the next six months, none of the major airlines are going to forceably drag someone off.  Too much bad publicity.

[SirLinksALot]

In this case, it wasn't overbooked, but they had a situation where they had to get a flight crew to another airport to crew a different flight.  According to @EC up thread, those kind of unplanned but necessary things sometimes happen.   So it sounds like they didn't know this was going to be necessary until after everyone had boarded.  And even if it was a ball being dropped somewhere, you still have to get off when asked.

It is possible that United could have handled this better with better planning.  But that doesn't remotely excuse -- in my opinion -- a passenger flatly refusing to deplane when ordered to do so.  To put it differently, United was within its legal rights to order him off the place, and call the cops if he refused to leave.   The passenger was not within his legal rights to refuse to deplane.

So, since the law states that the passenger is REQUIRED to deplane, what would someone like Justice Gorsuch do if the case were brought before him?

[ABX]

Libertarians generally believe in the sanctity of private contracts.  This doctor chose to violate his end of it.

Not necessarily. There was a question up-thread, and one worth asking, regarding pulling him off after he boarded. The contract (for all intents and purposes) says one can be denied entry, he was already granted entry when he was forced from his seat. Was it a justifiable removal based on his contract is the question and one that I'm sure United is sweating over right now.

The Libertarian in me says, like many others said, that they should have kept bidding up the offer for someone to give up their seat. Everyone has a price.

[thackney]

@mystery-ak

Flying is a "privilege?" 

It's that kind of attitude that results in lost customers.  While I get what William is saying, I don't think too many people would consider flying to be a privilege, at least not since 9/11

It certainly isn't a right.  Do you want to take away the airlines ability to throw someone off the plane?

While I get we don't like it when it is "us" thrown off, we darn sure want them to throw off someone making threats or significantly disrupting the flight.

[Cyber Liberty]

I feel rather confident​ in the next six months, none of the major airlines are going to forceably drag someone off.  Too much bad publicity.

I agree.  I expect them to completely unload the plane and start over, minus the bumped passengers. 

[Cyber Liberty]

The Libertarian in me says, like many others said, that they should have kept bidding up the offer for someone to give up their seat. Everyone has a price.

That may cost more than unloading everybody (I doubt it, slipping the schedule by the amount of time that would take may have costs), but I like it more.  $800!  Plus Hotel and likely free tix.  I'd have gone for it.  But my wife says I always went cheaply.   

[Polly Ticks]

New response from United:

[attachment deleted by admin]

[LonestarDream]

Not necessarily. There was a question up-thread, and one worth asking, regarding pulling him off after he boarded. The contract (for all intents and purposes) says one can be denied entry, he was already granted entry when he was forced from his seat. Was it a justifiable removal based on his contract is the question and one that I'm sure United is sweating over right now.

The Libertarian in me says, like many others said, that they should have kept bidding up the offer for someone to give up their seat. Everyone has a price.

Yes.  The sense of authoritarianism bothers me.  Here in NYC, only the 'privileged' get to drive.

As a general theme, the government would love to stack us all up in big cities and limit our mobility. 

[LonestarDream]

It certainly isn't a right.  Do you want to take away the airlines ability to throw someone off the plane?

While I get we don't like it when it is "us" thrown off, we darn sure want them to throw off someone making threats or significantly disrupting the flight.

In this instance the passenger in question was orderly and following his end of the bargain.

[thackney]

New response from United:

This was the response the "Communicator of the Year" should have sent the first time.

[thackney]

In this instance the passenger in question was orderly and following his end of the bargain.

No.  His end of the bargain includes following instruction from the crew. 

[Applewood]

It certainly isn't a right.  Do you want to take away the airlines ability to throw someone off the plane?

While I get we don't like it when it is "us" thrown off, we darn sure want them to throw off someone making threats or significantly disrupting the flight.

I didn't say anything of the sort. I was just amused by the word "privilege."

For many years US Airways and it's predecessors had a near monopoly on flights to and from Pittsburgh. And they treated their passengers like they should be "privileged"  that US Airways would transport them to where they wanted to go. I had more than a few encounters with surly US Airways employees. One even involved airport security.  And it seemed these unpleasant encounters always seemed to occur after the latest union contract was negotiated. The employees were angry that thru had to give concessions, but instead of sending their grievances to management, they would take out their anger on the passengers.

Well, US Airways lost its ability to be lords and masters over their passengers when Peoples Express and other cut-rate airlines sprang up in the 1980s. Got worse when Southwest, Jet Blue and others started cutting into the US Airways monopoly.  Passengers were lured by the cheaper fares, of course, but they stayed with these newer airlines because these carriers knew the meaning of "customer service."  Now, US Airways could have realized what was going on and maybe made changes to counter the inroads of these other carriers. But they didn't.   US Airways continued to treat their passengers like dirt, then wondered why they were losing money and customers. 

US Airways was eventually absorbed by American Airlines, but I have yet to fly with American.  I sure hope American learned the lessons on customer service that US Airways did not.

[skeeter]

It certainly isn't a right.  Do you want to take away the airlines ability to throw someone off the plane?

While I get we don't like it when it is "us" thrown off, we darn sure want them to throw off someone making threats or significantly disrupting the flight.

Planes are like ships - those authorities running them have always necessarily demanded complete compliance of those on board.

The rules governing relationships in a normal setting where the individual can exercise certain rights over the authorities do not apply.

[LonestarDream]

This was the response the "Communicator of the Year" should have sent the first time.

Funny how one billion in lost market cap changed his tone.  Take away his gates.

United Market leverage and their dominance in gate coverage is a much larger and capricious 'privilege'

[LonestarDream]

Well said.

I didn't say anything of the sort. I was just amused by the word "privilege."

For many years US Airways and it's predecessors had a near monopoly on flights to and from Pittsburgh. And they treated their passengers like they should be "privileged"  that US Airways would transport them to where they wanted to go. I had more than a few encounters with surly US Airways employees. One even involved airport security.  And it seemed these unpleasant encounters always seemed to occur after the latest union contract was negotiated. The employees were angry that thru had to give concessions, but instead of sending their grievances to management, they would take out their anger on the passengers.

Well, US Airways lost its ability to be lords and masters over their passengers when Peoples Express and other cut-rate airlines sprang up in the 1980s. Got worse when Southwest, Jet Blue and others started cutting into the US Airways monopoly.  Passengers were lured by the cheaper fares, of course, but they stayed with these newer airlines because these carriers knew the meaning of "customer service."  Now, US Airways could have realized what was going on and maybe made changes to counter the inroads of these other carriers. But they didn't.   US Airways continued to treat their passengers like dirt, then wondered why they were losing money and customers. 

US Airways was eventually absorbed by American Airlines, but I have yet to fly with American.  I sure hope American learned the lessons on customer service that US Airways did not.

[Polly Ticks]

This was the response the "Communicator of the Year" should have sent the first time.

I notice he apologized for everything except his own idiotic original response.

[Cyber Liberty]

Funny how one billion in lost market cap changed his tone.  Take away his gates.

United Market leverage and their dominance in gate coverage is a much larger and capricious 'privilege'

Did it turn out to be a Billion?  It was 600 Million early in the day, so a $1 Billion loss is certainly believable.

I don't know about taking gates away, that would only be good for the passengers if there were competing airlines to fill them, but they're certainly getting their butts kicked at the NYSE.  That's a lot of capital to lose.

[LonestarDream]

No.  His end of the bargain includes following instruction from the crew.

By this standard the whole flight should have been cancelled.  The indignant blond in the video was berating LE as Dr Davo was being abused. 

Additionally, the flight crew (which could have been transported on the ground or on other carriers) was berating by the 'surviving ' passengers all the way to KY.   

[Cyber Liberty]

By this standard the whole flight should have been cancelled.  The indignant blond in the video was berating LE as Dr Davo was being abused. 

Additionally, the flight crew (which could have been transported on the ground or on other carriers) was berating by the 'surviving ' passengers all the way to KY.

I find it amazing that other passengers, after witnessing this spectacle, would be so bold as to push their luck.

[LonestarDream]

Did it turn out to be a Billion?  It was 600 Million early in the day, so a $1 Billion loss is certainly believable.

I don't know about taking gates away, that would only be good for the passengers if there were competing airlines to fill them, but they're certainly getting their butts kicked at the NYSE.  That's a lot of capital to lose.

One Billion at the low water mark.  Take the gates away.  Or unwind the Continental merger. 


Many of us had misgivings about the Continental merger and they have come to pass.