Boy, if I was United I'd be worried about the optics of that. "United crews fly private rather than United!" or "When United needs their crews to get there on time, they rely on FlyOtto rather than their own planes!"
http://www.vox.com/new-money/2017/4/12/15247172/why-airlines-are-terribleTo me the solution is to stop this whole overbooking thing across the industry. I think that is one of few industries where this is allowed. Can bus lines or hotels do this? Imagine booking a hotel, you get there and get in your room then half an hour later they're asking you to leave because they overbooked the hotel and need your room.
You would also figure that they would prebook seats for moving crew. Like always show 4 seats as being unavailable on a plane so that they are available for crew or other unforeseen circumstances. It's really not that complicated. If a flight is constantly packed then perhaps that justifies having multiple flights at that particular time, might even get more customers overall as lot of people who tried to book at that time but could not would just go on the next flight.
Boy, if I was United I'd be worried about the optics of that. "United crews fly private rather than United!" or "When United needs their crews to get there on time, they rely on FlyOtto rather than their own planes!"
United just needs to do a better job of enticing people off rather than beating the shit out of them. That's the only solution that really makes sense. $1500 instead of $800 and this never happens.
United doesn't have its own private jets,
If you read the article I posted, you would see this:
But Delta does.
http://www.vox.com/new-money/2017/4/12/15247172/why-airlines-are-terrible
Overbooking is part and parcel with the domestic airline industry, and presumably in other countries as well. Ethically bumping a passenger who's already boarded is bullshit, but there are no federal regulations prohibiting it.
UAL has implied that the 4 employees purposely showed up at the last moment to get onto that flight. That explains why 4 passengers were bumped from confirmed seats, but doesn't explain if the airline fucked up in planning, or if the employees were assholes based on their knowledge of the system. Hence UAL just changing their policy to employees need to show up an hour before takeoff to get a seat without a reservation.
You're thinking in terms of neat compartments or numbers, say like finite computer storage or whatever. In reality, you cannot run a modern airline without overbooking. Humans are way too unreliable. The Vox.com article I linked is very long, but it explains how we got from 1950s-era aviation to today.But what I'm saying is it should not be part of the airline industry, it's a ridiculous concept. You should not be able to sell more tickets for something than what you can accommodate. I know in this case it was not really overbooked but similar concept. They should have already been accounting for staff seats.
So if the plane has 100 seats, then they should only sell 95 tickets for that particular flight. That leaves 5 seats open for "emergency" etc. Or staff, or if one seat is broken or w/e. But of course... greed/capitalism is what drives this. But then it ends up costing them in the end as they end up having to pay out customers to volunteer their seats, so is it really worth it?
I disagree. If passengers miss their flight, it is already paid for. Period. If said customer wants another seat on a later flight then that is going to cost the customer that was late. Using the excuse you cannot operating an airline without overbooking is a bean counter excuse. And a seat on a plane is a finite measurable widget. One seat, one ass.You're thinking in terms of neat compartments or numbers, say like finite computer storage or whatever. In reality, you cannot run a modern airline without overbooking. Humans are way too unreliable.
Humans are way too unreliable.
the ticket is already paid for, who gives a shit.
You're thinking in terms of neat compartments or numbers, say like finite computer storage or whatever. In reality, you cannot run a modern airline without overbooking. Humans are way too unreliable. The Vox.com article I linked is very long, but it explains how we got from 1950s-era aviation to today.
I'm not trying to justify UAL's actions as even under a best case scenario (4 passengers left that flight without incident), it was still a situation where the airline could prioritize its interests over a paying, seated customer's interests. I totally agree with you that that's wrong and unethical. What I am saying is the goal of every airline is for every flight to fly full.
In an ideal consumer-friendly world, they'd hold back a number of seats "just in case." But we don't live in that world. Commercial aviation is a competitive industry, and consumers have largely benefited from discount airliners upending the industry. The bottom line is flights are much cheaper than they were 4 decades ago, but we put up with shitty deals in exchange for low cost.
the ticket is already paid for, who gives a shit.
The US airline industry was basically insolvent a decade ago, so in a sense, all their efforts to maximize profits are to keep the planes flying. Until corporations are prohibited from maximizing profits, policies that are consumer-unfriendly such as overbooking will continue to be the norm. It's a trade-off, we enjoy low fares on heavily-trafficked routes but we get packed in like sardines and treated like cattle.The process of overbooking is so the airline can maximize it's profits.. not to "just keep the airline running". Most of those seats that are empty are because of the games the airlines play with causing people to have connections. If they did a better job booking people and factoring in connection times we wouldn't have so many empty seats.. I can't help but see this as an issue the airlines created all so they can squeeze out every single cent they can.
HOW did you do that?I've arrived at hotels 4 times on popular weekends to be told that they overbooked and the next available hotel is over an hour away (each way, for a trip where I wanted to be right where the hotel was located).
Luckily for me, I've gotten out of that by (a) taking the hotel staff's room, (b) taking a room that they normally don't rent out to anyone unless you are paying 10x to 100x more per night, (c) taking the room that the person next to me is currently checking into
You don't think overbooking is baked into airlines' pricing models? Let's say overbooking is outlawed tomorrow and fares are 10% higher on average. Do you take that deal?
(a) Taking the hotel staff's room. I was persistent, firm, and polite with proof that I had paid. We had to wait an hour to check in as they cleaned the room. I assume two staff members just shared a room for the couple of nights we were there.HOW did you do that?
(a) Taking the hotel staff's room. I was persistent, firm, and polite with proof that I had paid. We had to wait an hour to check in as they cleaned the room. I assume two staff members just shared a room for the couple of nights we were there.
(b) Taking a room that they normally don't rent out to anyone unless you are paying 10x to 100x more per night. I was on hold on the phone for 2+ hours with the management (while my wife was patiently waiting eating her dinner in a fancy restaurant, which ruined the meal) while trying desperately to find any available room in town. Again, I had proof that I had booked online. This time the hotel had just switched processing companies that deal with online booking and double booked--once with each processing company. They finally relented and gave me a luxury 8-room cottage that wasn't booked that weekend (we had booked their cheapest room with shared bathroom).
(c) Taking the room that the person next to me is currently checking into. This time I had booked the day before and the hotel staff wasn't notified. As I pulled up to the hotel around midnight, another car pulled up at the same time. They entered first and asked for a room (they had no reservation). There was one left. Then the staff turned to me and said that this person was taking the last available room and that I'd need to drive 50+ miles to the next town. I said that I had a reservation, showed proof of payment, and the person who got there seconds before me was turned away.
(d) Bigger hotels have that one room that they won't rent out because it is terrible but they have in reserve for this purpose. Same story as case (c), although we were checking in around 8 PM. Some group arrived seconds before me and was being told about one last room that was available (they had no reservation). As they were discussing the room, I tried to check in and was told that the hotel screwed up since they had no normal rooms left. I believe that I was given the room that the group next to me was debating (it had one too few beds for their needs). It was a large hotel and it is the center basement room that was filled with bugs and didn't look like it had been cleaned in months. But, it was a busy holiday weekend and I took it.
I stopped using Expedia (cause or partial cause of problems a, b, and d). Their reservation system apparently books you without contacting the hotel directly to see if there is still a room available.
I've also been on the wrong side of the stick. I was turned away once for a double-booked hotel room but they had a sister hotel a few blocks away with a room.
And if you had bothered to read and understand, you would have understood that I did read and that it wasn't remotely germane to the discussion. The message is that United sends their crew on competitors rather than on their own flights and that looks bad for any reason. So any competitor could say "United uses us rather than themselves, you should too".
It says the officer was able to pull Dao up from his seat and toward the aisle, but then lost his grip because Dao kept fighting.
Latest news, Chicago Department of Aviation (the three security guys that manhandled the old guy) said its officers "used minimal force". Minimal = bloody face, broken teeth and more?
So now it is no longer about "he fell" but the officer lose his grip. Interesting spin.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...sary-force-police-say/?utm_term=.f8eb199741f6
AKA: It's actually his fault that he got injured. Had he just been a compliant citizen, none of this badness would have happened.
Yes, blame the victim.
"Your honor, if she was a compliant participant to my request and lay back and take it, the rape would be a smooth one, she probably would like it too. None of the bruise, broken teeth, cuts in her face would ever happened".
Tell me. Who is apologizing to who in this case again if the old guy was in the wrong? Uh huh..
Ok, I was with you right up until you compared a legal order from a law enforcement officer to deplane to rape. I think what happened was terrible, but you just jumped the shark and went off the reservation both.
I don't side with United one bit, but citizens must obey orders from law enforcement, even if you disagree with the order at the time. To do otherwise is to accept that the officers will use force to make you comply, which may very well lead to you being injured, This is exactly what happened to this doctor. It was his decision to disobey the order.
If he believed the order was unlawful then he has to take it to court and let a judge decide. Refusing the order, right or wrong, always = LE using force. Always.
I watched that video over and over. Once the decision was made to force the man to deplane there was no excessive use of force. How could they have used less force and removed him?
The correct solution should have been to offer more in compensation to motivate a passenger to give up his seat long before law enforcement was ever called. That's United's failure to own. LE did nothing wrong once the decision to use force was made.
You comparing it to rape was just silly.
Historically there have been 'issues' with the unadulterated acceptance of authority. Resistance to compliance of an unacceptable order (note unacceptable, not unlawful) is perfectly within the rights of us as living, breathing, sentient creatures. The right to authority is granted by the people and it can be taken away as well, or at least admonished, as was the case with this instance.
The comparison to rape was acceptable IMO, because it's an overreach of an individual's authority into the life of another. One may have been legal but that doesn't make it acceptable.
This guy was just 'on the way home' too. One may not always be looking to start a revolutionary change in the moment but it can still happen. Please note that I'm not putting the doctor on the same pedestal as this fine Chinese gentleman, but you can challenge laws in a public display, even in the most corrupt and authoritative of governments. In fact sometimes that's the best place to do it.Yes, The People grant the right of authority, but an individual person cannot refuse lawful orders from authority. Courts are where laws are challenged, not in the street unless you are trying to effect change. I doubt that doctor had any such intent. He just wanted to get home and was too stupid/sick/crazy to understand he needed to comply or they would use force.
The consequences to the government tend to be much more severe than the one to the people, that's why it's done, even if it's a spur of the moment decision.The right to authority is granted by The People, i.e., society as a whole via the democratic process. An individual cannot disregard that authority without expecting consequences.
Historically there have been 'issues' with the unadulterated acceptance of authority. Resistance to compliance of an unacceptable order (note unacceptable, not unlawful) is perfectly within the rights of us as living, breathing, sentient creatures. The right to authority is granted by the people and it can be taken away as well, or at least admonished, as was the case with this instance.
The comparison to rape was acceptable IMO, because it's an overreach of an individual's authority into the life of another. One may have been legal but that doesn't make it acceptable.
Absolutely nowhere near the same situation.