4 ms·

Can someone read this: https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriage.aspx https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriag... and

by adekok 10y ago

Can someone read this: https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriage.aspx https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriag... and explain where it allows them to refuse transport to a well-behaved passenger after boarding? Rule 21 seems to apply, but nothing there looks like "United can refuse to transport you 'just cause'". I've seen lots of people claim this behavior is legal, all without a shred of evidence to back them up.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
icantdrive55 10y ago
It has someting to do with FAA regulations. Basically, they own you when you step on that plane.
tiatia 10y ago
I have not used United in many years after a major cluster f.. on a trip. Things like this were supposed to happen sooner or later. This airline hast a total "FU" attitude regarding customers. It is the only airline that I insist of not using. Regarding the boarding, this was posted by a lawyer: [Edit: This is about the recent incident, not this HN post] 1. First of all, it’s airline spin to call this an overbooking. The statutory provision granting them the ability to deny boarding is about “OVERSELLING”, which is specifically defined as booking more reserved confirmed seats than there are available. This is not what happened. They did not overbook the flight; they had a fully booked flight, and not only did everyone already have a reserved confirmed seat, they were all sitting in them. The law allowing them to deny boarding in the event of an oversale does not apply. 2. Even if it did apply, the law is unambiguously clear that airlines have to give preference to everyone with reserved confirmed seats when choosing to involuntarily deny boarding. They have to always choose the solution that will affect the least amount of reserved confirmed seats. This rule is straightforward, and United makes very clear in their own contract of carriage that employees of their own or of other carriers may be denied boarding without compensation because they do not have reserved confirmed seats. On its face, it’s clear that what they did was illegal– they gave preference to their employees over people who had reserved confirmed seats, in violation of 14 CFR 250.2a. 3. Furthermore, even if you try and twist this into a legal application of 250.2a and say that United had the right to deny him boarding in the event of an overbooking; they did NOT have the right to kick him off the plane. Their contract of carriage highlights there is a complete difference in rights after you’ve boarded and sat on the plane, and Rule 21 goes over the specific scenarios where you could get kicked off. NONE of them apply here. He did absolutely nothing wrong and shouldn’t have been targeted. He’s going to leave with a hefty settlement after this fiasco.
jacquesm 10y ago
Even if it would be legal that does not make it right.
- pyre 10y ago
  I don't think that this was being alluded to, just a question of how this is supposedly legal, since lots of people are stating that it is without anything to back it up.
gambiting 10y ago
Quite simple - United defines boarding as having everyone seated and the doors closed. Until that point you haven't boarded yet, as stupid as that sounds.
- criddell 10y ago
  If it got to court, I'm thinking a judge is going to be a little skeptical of United's definition.

by adekok 10y ago

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

icantdrive55 10y ago

It has someting to do with FAA regulations. Basically, they own you when you step on that plane.

tiatia 10y ago

I have not used United in many years after a major cluster f.. on a trip. Things like this were supposed to happen sooner or later. This airline hast a total "FU" attitude regarding customers. It is the only airline that I insist of not using. Regarding the boarding, this was posted by a lawyer: [Edit: This is about the recent incident, not this HN post] 1. First of all, it’s airline spin to call this an overbooking. The statutory provision granting them the ability to deny boarding is about “OVERSELLING”, which is specifically defined as booking more reserved confirmed seats than there are available. This is not what happened. They did not overbook the flight; they had a fully booked flight, and not only did everyone already have a reserved confirmed seat, they were all sitting in them. The law allowing them to deny boarding in the event of an oversale does not apply. 2. Even if it did apply, the law is unambiguously clear that airlines have to give preference to everyone with reserved confirmed seats when choosing to involuntarily deny boarding. They have to always choose the solution that will affect the least amount of reserved confirmed seats. This rule is straightforward, and United makes very clear in their own contract of carriage that employees of their own or of other carriers may be denied boarding without compensation because they do not have reserved confirmed seats. On its face, it’s clear that what they did was illegal– they gave preference to their employees over people who had reserved confirmed seats, in violation of 14 CFR 250.2a. 3. Furthermore, even if you try and twist this into a legal application of 250.2a and say that United had the right to deny him boarding in the event of an overbooking; they did NOT have the right to kick him off the plane. Their contract of carriage highlights there is a complete difference in rights after you’ve boarded and sat on the plane, and Rule 21 goes over the specific scenarios where you could get kicked off. NONE of them apply here. He did absolutely nothing wrong and shouldn’t have been targeted. He’s going to leave with a hefty settlement after this fiasco.

jacquesm 10y ago

Even if it would be legal that does not make it right.

pyre 10y ago
I don't think that this was being alluded to, just a question of how this is supposedly legal, since lots of people are stating that it is without anything to back it up.

gambiting 10y ago

Quite simple - United defines boarding as having everyone seated and the doors closed. Until that point you haven't boarded yet, as stupid as that sounds.

criddell 10y ago
If it got to court, I'm thinking a judge is going to be a little skeptical of United's definition.