7 ms·

> Their 'contract of carriage' allows them to IDB (Involuntary Deny Boarding) to passengers due to overselling, and bump people off at-will. But my understandi

by jfk13 10y ago

> Their 'contract of carriage' allows them to IDB (Involuntary Deny Boarding) to passengers due to overselling, and bump people off at-will. But my understanding from the article is that the problem here was not overselling; they decided to give priority to moving their employees around over providing the contracted service to ticketed passengers. It's hard to see how that's justifiable even by the letter of the law.

toomuchtodo 10y ago
If there's equipment waiting in Louisville, and another entire plane isn't going anywhere without them, that's how its justifiable. IDB means you can (legally) be physically removed from a flight. With that said, don't drag people off your flights. No matter what it costs you to get staff where they need to be when you make this mistake, it'll be cheaper than the negative publicity of a physical altercation removing a passenger (even if you need to retask a commuter aircraft just to relocate the crew, or ask another carrier to get them there).
- zeveb 10y ago
  > With that said, don't drag people off your flights. No matter what it costs you to get staff where they need to be when you make this mistake, it'll be cheaper than the negative publicity of a physical altercation removing a passenger (even if you need to retask a commuter aircraft just to relocate the crew, or ask another carrier to get them there). Of course, that just gives a hecker's veto to anyone insubordinate enough to refuse to leave. What they probably should have done was select another passenger, and have police waiting for the recalcitrant passenger at the destination airport: that would satisfy the need to get personnel to their destination and ensure punishment for someone violating his contract and wouldn't cause a scene.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - SamBam 10y ago
    No, what they should have done is exactly what other airlines do when they are overbooked: keep raising the voucher amount until someone volunteers to get off. And if you can't find someone to get off at a price that seems appropriate (which is very unlikely: you're always going to find someone willing to take $1000), work out other arrangements. The moment you've escalated to "we've selected people at random, and we are willing to eject people by violence or arrest them on the other end" you've already lost.
    - toomuchtodo 10y ago
      Exactly.
    - acchow 10y ago
      Unless you have some bizarre demand curve due to extreme circumstances (famine, civil war, etc) there will always be a clearing price. No need for violence.
      - jordanb 10y ago
        Yeah but that would affect profits. Much better to just rough the self-loading cargo up a bit and drag it off the plane. /s
      - toomuchtodo 10y ago
        It doesn't even have to be bizarre. I've been on flights where the entire flight is going to Mardi Gras, spring break in Daytona, or a cruise; when everyone is expecting to be somewhere, the clearing price can quickly exceed what you'd expect.
        tutufan 10y ago
        I suspect that in retrospect, United would gladly have paid $100,000 to avoid this fiasco.
        toomuchtodo 10y ago
  - crooked-v 10y ago
    > and have police waiting for the recalcitrant passenger at the destination airport To do what, exactly?
    - khedoros1 10y ago
      Arrest him for trespassing and fine him for interfering with a member of the flight crew, apparently.
      - CaptainZapp 10y ago
        You are not trespassing when you are in an establishment, a venue, or even a plane having bought a valid ticket for said establishment, venue or plane.
        khedoros1 10y ago
        Are you sure about that, if they inform you that they're revoking your ticket and telling you to leave? Passengers are required to obey the flight crew at all times. "Rule 21: Refusal of Transport: UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons:" "H. Safety – Whenever refusal or removal of a Passenger may be necessary for the safety of such Passenger or other Passengers or members of the crew including, but not limited to: " "2. Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew, federal regulations, or security directives;" Or, if not trespassing, would you like "breach of contract" or something? I'm sure they could find something; I'm neither very creative or experienced when it comes to making up criminal charges in order to punish people for interfering with my profit.
        CaptainZapp 10y ago
        Are you sure about that No, I'm not :) What is clear, though, is that he had a right to be on his seat before the whole sorry mess started. They probably could get him for "interfering with a flight crew" or some such crap after they asked him to leave. While passengers usually do get the short end of the stick (and in the case of United it appears that the stick is always covered in shit, but I digress) I think the situation in Europe is a lot better. When bumped, or even if you experience extended delays the airline must compensate you in cash. No useless vouchers, which are hard to redeem. There are a few exceptions, were that doesn't apply, namely if delays are beyond their control. Mechanical problems, however, don't count because it's their duty to properly maintain their gear. Passenger rights within the EU are clearly spelled out and airlines can't subvert them by mealy mouthed "contracts of carriage" I'd also wager that this wouldn't have escalated to this point virtually anywhere in Europe. Since the "smack him in the face and that'll teach him to comply" philosophy of policing seems much less aparent.
- FireBeyond 10y ago
  Still doesn't make the original flight "oversold". That's a very specific term in airline travel relating to ticketed seats sold for a flight, not a United staffing fuckup. Edited: for clarity.
  - toomuchtodo 10y ago
    > Not a United staffing fuckup If a doctor gets physically assaulted by Chicago's Aviation Authority staff because you didn't leave four seats free on your flight, you most assuredly fucked up.
    - to3m 10y ago
      The point is that "oversold" is not the appropriate term.
    - Mithaldu 10y ago
      He's saying this IS a staffing fuckup, and the term "oversold" or "overbooked" is wrong here, as it relates to having too many tickets for a plane, not UA staff fucking up.
  - Scea91 10y ago
    It's still overselling. The maximum capacity is just not N but N - 4.
tedmiston 10y ago
At the end of the day, the contract of carriage clauses are extremely broad and disadvantageous to the consumer. If the airline decides they want someone, or you, off the flight, there's actually very little recourse. Even the amount of time they can delay you without compensation during the day and with minimal compensation overnight is pretty absurd. That said, I'm not sure why they wouldn't just offer increasing compensation for those willing to bump to the next flight like usual. Four people will accept a few hundred to a thousand dollars to be bumped one flight.

by jfk13 10y ago

toomuchtodo 10y ago

If there's equipment waiting in Louisville, and another entire plane isn't going anywhere without them, that's how its justifiable. IDB means you can (legally) be physically removed from a flight. With that said, don't drag people off your flights. No matter what it costs you to get staff where they need to be when you make this mistake, it'll be cheaper than the negative publicity of a physical altercation removing a passenger (even if you need to retask a commuter aircraft just to relocate the crew, or ask another carrier to get them there).

zeveb 10y ago
> With that said, don't drag people off your flights. No matter what it costs you to get staff where they need to be when you make this mistake, it'll be cheaper than the negative publicity of a physical altercation removing a passenger (even if you need to retask a commuter aircraft just to relocate the crew, or ask another carrier to get them there). Of course, that just gives a hecker's veto to anyone insubordinate enough to refuse to leave. What they probably should have done was select another passenger, and have police waiting for the recalcitrant passenger at the destination airport: that would satisfy the need to get personnel to their destination and ensure punishment for someone violating his contract and wouldn't cause a scene.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- SamBam 10y ago
  No, what they should have done is exactly what other airlines do when they are overbooked: keep raising the voucher amount until someone volunteers to get off. And if you can't find someone to get off at a price that seems appropriate (which is very unlikely: you're always going to find someone willing to take $1000), work out other arrangements. The moment you've escalated to "we've selected people at random, and we are willing to eject people by violence or arrest them on the other end" you've already lost.
  - toomuchtodo 10y ago
    Exactly.
  - acchow 10y ago
    Unless you have some bizarre demand curve due to extreme circumstances (famine, civil war, etc) there will always be a clearing price. No need for violence.
    - jordanb 10y ago
      Yeah but that would affect profits. Much better to just rough the self-loading cargo up a bit and drag it off the plane. /s
    - toomuchtodo 10y ago
      It doesn't even have to be bizarre. I've been on flights where the entire flight is going to Mardi Gras, spring break in Daytona, or a cruise; when everyone is expecting to be somewhere, the clearing price can quickly exceed what you'd expect.
      - tutufan 10y ago
        I suspect that in retrospect, United would gladly have paid $100,000 to avoid this fiasco.
        toomuchtodo 10y ago
- crooked-v 10y ago
  > and have police waiting for the recalcitrant passenger at the destination airport To do what, exactly?
  - khedoros1 10y ago
    Arrest him for trespassing and fine him for interfering with a member of the flight crew, apparently.
    - CaptainZapp 10y ago
      You are not trespassing when you are in an establishment, a venue, or even a plane having bought a valid ticket for said establishment, venue or plane.
      - khedoros1 10y ago
        Are you sure about that, if they inform you that they're revoking your ticket and telling you to leave? Passengers are required to obey the flight crew at all times. "Rule 21: Refusal of Transport: UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons:" "H. Safety – Whenever refusal or removal of a Passenger may be necessary for the safety of such Passenger or other Passengers or members of the crew including, but not limited to: " "2. Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew, federal regulations, or security directives;" Or, if not trespassing, would you like "breach of contract" or something? I'm sure they could find something; I'm neither very creative or experienced when it comes to making up criminal charges in order to punish people for interfering with my profit.
        CaptainZapp 10y ago
        Are you sure about that No, I'm not :) What is clear, though, is that he had a right to be on his seat before the whole sorry mess started. They probably could get him for "interfering with a flight crew" or some such crap after they asked him to leave. While passengers usually do get the short end of the stick (and in the case of United it appears that the stick is always covered in shit, but I digress) I think the situation in Europe is a lot better. When bumped, or even if you experience extended delays the airline must compensate you in cash. No useless vouchers, which are hard to redeem. There are a few exceptions, were that doesn't apply, namely if delays are beyond their control. Mechanical problems, however, don't count because it's their duty to properly maintain their gear. Passenger rights within the EU are clearly spelled out and airlines can't subvert them by mealy mouthed "contracts of carriage" I'd also wager that this wouldn't have escalated to this point virtually anywhere in Europe. Since the "smack him in the face and that'll teach him to comply" philosophy of policing seems much less aparent.
FireBeyond 10y ago
Still doesn't make the original flight "oversold". That's a very specific term in airline travel relating to ticketed seats sold for a flight, not a United staffing fuckup. Edited: for clarity.
- toomuchtodo 10y ago
  > Not a United staffing fuckup If a doctor gets physically assaulted by Chicago's Aviation Authority staff because you didn't leave four seats free on your flight, you most assuredly fucked up.
  - to3m 10y ago
    The point is that "oversold" is not the appropriate term.
  - Mithaldu 10y ago
    He's saying this IS a staffing fuckup, and the term "oversold" or "overbooked" is wrong here, as it relates to having too many tickets for a plane, not UA staff fucking up.
- Scea91 10y ago
  It's still overselling. The maximum capacity is just not N but N - 4.

tedmiston 10y ago

At the end of the day, the contract of carriage clauses are extremely broad and disadvantageous to the consumer. If the airline decides they want someone, or you, off the flight, there's actually very little recourse. Even the amount of time they can delay you without compensation during the day and with minimal compensation overnight is pretty absurd. That said, I'm not sure why they wouldn't just offer increasing compensation for those willing to bump to the next flight like usual. Four people will accept a few hundred to a thousand dollars to be bumped one flight.