6 ms·

as I said before oversell is defined in the contract as more passengers than available seats, it is not defined as more passengers than seats. Some of the seat

by vivekd 10y ago

as I said before oversell is defined in the contract as more passengers than available seats, it is not defined as more passengers than seats. Some of the seats were unavailable because they were given to airline employees - this, while poor customer service, is well within the defined terms of the contract.

tyingq 10y ago
"Oversold Flight means a flight where there are more Passengers holding valid confirmed Tickets" Sorry, it's not that easy. Employees flying non-revenue don't have "valid confirmed Tickets". At best, they have something called a "must ride" pass. That also doesn't address what "Boarding" means. Can you "deny boarding" to someone already on board? If so, are you using the various other references to "board/ed/ing" in the same light in the contract? For what it's worth, I'm not 100% convinced I'm right here. I'm not a lawyer. But there are real aviation lawyers saying this looks very grey. That's why I'm suspicious of opinions saying this is a simple matter.
DannyBee 10y ago
IAAL. This is again wrong, you have skipped the important part of the oversold definition. It says "Oversold Flight means a flight where there are more Passengers holding valid confirmed Tickets that check-in for the flight within the prescribed check-in time than there are available seats." This was not the case. The employees did not have valid confirmed tickets, and they did not check in within the prescribed time anyway. United does not even dispute this, because they can't. They could not have legally confirmed a ticket at that point. You can't just eliminate the "valid, confirmed ticket" part. It is the actual important part.
- kelnos 10y ago
  "More Passengers holding valid confirmed Tickets... than there are available seats." If crew repositioning granted those four employees "must ride" passes, could United not make the argument that those four seats were then not "available" per that definition? So: 70 ticketed passengers, 70 physical seats on the plane. Four employees arrive for repositioning. Now you have 70 ticketed passengers, 66 available seats. By the definition in the contract, there are more ticketed passengers than available seats, so the flight is oversold. The one bit that I think does change this is the part I left out in the ellipsis: "that check-in for the flight within the prescribed check-in time". By the time they tried to remove people from the plane, the "prescribed check-in time" may have ended, so you could make the argument that, when check-in ended, there were still 70 available seats. But maybe check-in hadn't ended, so who knows. It also isn't clear from the wording if my interpretation here is valid: the check-in window may not limit the time during which the number of available seats is determined. Also consider another "availability" scenario: 70 ticketed passengers, 70 seats on the plane. All 70 passengers get on, but 1 passenger finds that their seat is damaged. The crew determines that the damage to the seat cannot be repaired in such a way as to legally fly someone in the seat, at least not in the time they have. Now they have 69 available seats and 70 ticketed passengers, all of whom who have technically "boarded". Let's assume there are only enough jump seats for the FAs, and the flight can't leave one behind and fly without (assuming it's even legal to fly a passenger in a jump seat). What do they do? Obviously in this case the passenger is going to be more cooperative, because they physically do not have a seat to sit in, but is it differently legally? (Though perhaps this situation would fall under Rule 21, Section H, "Safety"?)
  - DannyBee 10y ago
    "If crew repositioning granted those four employees "must ride" passes, could United not make the argument that those four seats were then not "available" per that definition? " No. Because by the point that happened, they had ticketed, confirmed, and reserved all of the space. By definition, it couldn't be confirmed and reserved space if they had reduced the number of available seats ahead of time, but they didn't. They marked everyone else as confirmed and reserved. There is no provision for changing the number of seats after the fact. The number of spaces on the flight is actually fixed ahead of time, again, by law ;) This is why united's contract of carriage says: "A reservation for space on a given flight of UA is valid when the availability and allocation of such space is confirmed by UA and entered into the carrier’s reservations system. " Note: ahead of time. it continues: "Subject to payment or other satisfactory credit arrangements, a validated Ticket will be issued by UA or the authorized agent of UA indicating such confirmed reserved space provided the Passenger applies to UA or the authorized agent of UA for such Ticket within the Check-In Time Limits" and " Once a Passenger obtains a Ticket indicating confirmed reserved space for a specific flight and date either from UA or its authorized agent, the reservation is confirmed even if there is no record thereof in UA’s reservation system." There are no provisions for undoing this. At the point they confirmed it at check-in, it's confirmed and reserved, period. No takebacks. Further, there are no provisions for "must-ride" tickets in the contract of carriage. They can't even make the argument they gave them zero fare tickets. The CFR, again, says " A zero fare ticket does not include free or reduced rate air transportation provided to airline employees and guests." They pretty much have no way out of this.
    - kelnos 10y ago
      Thank you for the explanation. This was the last possible hole I could think of, and it's nice to see it closed.

by vivekd 10y ago

tyingq 10y ago

"Oversold Flight means a flight where there are more Passengers holding valid confirmed Tickets" Sorry, it's not that easy. Employees flying non-revenue don't have "valid confirmed Tickets". At best, they have something called a "must ride" pass. That also doesn't address what "Boarding" means. Can you "deny boarding" to someone already on board? If so, are you using the various other references to "board/ed/ing" in the same light in the contract? For what it's worth, I'm not 100% convinced I'm right here. I'm not a lawyer. But there are real aviation lawyers saying this looks very grey. That's why I'm suspicious of opinions saying this is a simple matter.

DannyBee 10y ago

IAAL. This is again wrong, you have skipped the important part of the oversold definition. It says "Oversold Flight means a flight where there are more Passengers holding valid confirmed Tickets that check-in for the flight within the prescribed check-in time than there are available seats." This was not the case. The employees did not have valid confirmed tickets, and they did not check in within the prescribed time anyway. United does not even dispute this, because they can't. They could not have legally confirmed a ticket at that point. You can't just eliminate the "valid, confirmed ticket" part. It is the actual important part.

kelnos 10y ago
"More Passengers holding valid confirmed Tickets... than there are available seats." If crew repositioning granted those four employees "must ride" passes, could United not make the argument that those four seats were then not "available" per that definition? So: 70 ticketed passengers, 70 physical seats on the plane. Four employees arrive for repositioning. Now you have 70 ticketed passengers, 66 available seats. By the definition in the contract, there are more ticketed passengers than available seats, so the flight is oversold. The one bit that I think does change this is the part I left out in the ellipsis: "that check-in for the flight within the prescribed check-in time". By the time they tried to remove people from the plane, the "prescribed check-in time" may have ended, so you could make the argument that, when check-in ended, there were still 70 available seats. But maybe check-in hadn't ended, so who knows. It also isn't clear from the wording if my interpretation here is valid: the check-in window may not limit the time during which the number of available seats is determined. Also consider another "availability" scenario: 70 ticketed passengers, 70 seats on the plane. All 70 passengers get on, but 1 passenger finds that their seat is damaged. The crew determines that the damage to the seat cannot be repaired in such a way as to legally fly someone in the seat, at least not in the time they have. Now they have 69 available seats and 70 ticketed passengers, all of whom who have technically "boarded". Let's assume there are only enough jump seats for the FAs, and the flight can't leave one behind and fly without (assuming it's even legal to fly a passenger in a jump seat). What do they do? Obviously in this case the passenger is going to be more cooperative, because they physically do not have a seat to sit in, but is it differently legally? (Though perhaps this situation would fall under Rule 21, Section H, "Safety"?)
- DannyBee 10y ago
  "If crew repositioning granted those four employees "must ride" passes, could United not make the argument that those four seats were then not "available" per that definition? " No. Because by the point that happened, they had ticketed, confirmed, and reserved all of the space. By definition, it couldn't be confirmed and reserved space if they had reduced the number of available seats ahead of time, but they didn't. They marked everyone else as confirmed and reserved. There is no provision for changing the number of seats after the fact. The number of spaces on the flight is actually fixed ahead of time, again, by law ;) This is why united's contract of carriage says: "A reservation for space on a given flight of UA is valid when the availability and allocation of such space is confirmed by UA and entered into the carrier’s reservations system. " Note: ahead of time. it continues: "Subject to payment or other satisfactory credit arrangements, a validated Ticket will be issued by UA or the authorized agent of UA indicating such confirmed reserved space provided the Passenger applies to UA or the authorized agent of UA for such Ticket within the Check-In Time Limits" and " Once a Passenger obtains a Ticket indicating confirmed reserved space for a specific flight and date either from UA or its authorized agent, the reservation is confirmed even if there is no record thereof in UA’s reservation system." There are no provisions for undoing this. At the point they confirmed it at check-in, it's confirmed and reserved, period. No takebacks. Further, there are no provisions for "must-ride" tickets in the contract of carriage. They can't even make the argument they gave them zero fare tickets. The CFR, again, says " A zero fare ticket does not include free or reduced rate air transportation provided to airline employees and guests." They pretty much have no way out of this.
  - kelnos 10y ago
    Thank you for the explanation. This was the last possible hole I could think of, and it's nice to see it closed.