Man Dragged off United Airlines/Flight Overbooked, April 2017

[rosesfromangels]

Because of his age, I am wondering if he did not experience some of the horror of Vietnam. If so, I'm sure this added to his terror.
I am absolutely *livid* watching the video of this grandfather being dragged off the plane. I pray he gets well compensated for this brutal assault that left him battered and bleeding. This could have been handled *much* differently. I applaud the passengers who protested loudly. It's good to see some people still have a sense of human decency. I will literally never fly United Airlines again unless I am forced to out of necessity.

 

[FelicityLemon]

That is your assumption that he mentioned he was a doctor because he "thought it made him more important that other passengers".

Regardless, whether or not you have any sympathy for this guy has no bearing on whether or not what happened was legally defensible or morally correct.

I probably would have done the same thing he did up to the point where they were clearly about to put their hands on me, then I would have agreed to leave.

It is interesting to read how some people interpret his behavior and the conclusions they draw, I have to wonder if people would feel the same way if it was an old woman the same age as him.

Yes it is interesting how ALL people interpret anyone's behavior

I would feel the same way. Sorry old woman, you took a chance and lost. - Not YOU drjones, lol. I'm an old lady.Be smart, don't poke the bear. *shrugs* Personal responsibility, self-preservation. I

Of course, some people welcome a situation such as this seeing it as a fat ole' pay day.

 

[CARIIS]

That is your assumption that he mentioned he was a doctor because he "thought it made him more important that other passengers".

Regardless, whether or not you have any sympathy for this guy has no bearing on whether or not what happened was legally defensible or morally correct.

I probably would have done the same thing he did up to the point where they were clearly about to put their hands on me, then I would have agreed to leave.

It is interesting to read how some people interpret his behavior and the conclusions they draw, I have to wonder if people would feel the same way if it was an old woman the same age as him.

SHe won the academy award for this :!!!
Could not find the whole scene! She was a perpetual stowaway!!

The guy on the left has a bomb! She was gonna try to distract him so they could grab the bomb! I am surprised I could not find the rest of the scene!!

[video=youtube;y5T7aFvncZk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5T7aFvncZk[/video]

 

[drjones]

Going back to being logical, I've always wanted to know a rational explanation as to why do airlines overbook?

Don't we have to pay for our tickets whether we show up or not? What's the problem with a paid-for empty seat?

because many times the ticket for the empty seat ends up taking up a seat on a different flight, so it costs the airline two seats, the airlines probably argue that it helps keep airfares down but im not sure if this is actually true. overbooking allows the airline to have a paid customer right there when an empty seat turns up.

 

[FelicityLemon]

and this is important why? he also said "just kill me" after he reboarded - would this be justification for them actually then killing him?.

Yes, by all means they should have killed him.

It's important that he says those words (drag me down) because it shows he's fully aware of what his continued behavior could invite.

Again, I'm not saying it was handled well, but he must take some responsibility.

 

[FelicityLemon]

They overbook in markets with a higher "no show" rate, some tickets are refundable. But if they can get 2 fares for 1 seat their pretty happy I'm sure.

Just to be clear though this flight was not overbooked. It was full and then a crew of 4 came last minute saying they had to get to the destination city for a flight. So 4 paying passengers needed to get off for the 4 crew members.

That's what my thinking was, that two profits for one seat would be delightful.

I know it was for staff in this case. They should have chartered a plane or helicopter for them. Either that or like other people have said, offer a large enough sum CASH - for a reasonable, but profitable amount, I'd give it up for cash

 

[Gardenista]

Because of his age, I am wondering if he did not experience some of the horror of Vietnam. If so, I'm sure this added to his terror.
I am absolutely *livid* watching the video of this grandfather being dragged off the plane. I pray he gets well compensated for this brutal assault that left him battered and bleeding. This could have been handled *much* differently. I applaud the passengers who protested loudly. It's good to see some people still have a sense of human decency. I will literally never fly United Airlines again unless I am forced to out of necessity.

I LOL'd at brutal assault.

 

[LaneGirl]

I LOL'd at brutal assault.

He will be LOLing all the way to the bank, I'm sure as he should be compensated.

 

[gitana1]

Not untrue.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

US code

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. It is very much untrue. $1,350 is the most they can be FORCED to pay. There is no law that forbids a company from reimbursing a customer whatever amount they want over what is capped.

For example, medical malpractice is capped at 250k in California. That doesn't mean a hospital is forbidden from offering more. They just don't have to. A cap is not a prohibition against a company voluntarily going past the cap.

Per the Commerce Clause there are limits to the power to regulate business. That would be an impermissible burden of interstate commerce per the Constitution.

 

[jadejazzkayla]

The employee making the offer obviously didn't even know what the limits were because they did not up the offer to the maximum. I would expect a gate agent to know the policies and procedures of their airline but not necessarily know the law in regards to offering more than what their limits are.

What law?

 

[drjones]

Yes, by all means they should have killed him.

It's important that he says those words (drag me down) because it shows he's fully aware of what his continued behavior could invite.

Again, I'm not saying it was handled well, but he must take some responsibility.

right, the point is of course that it does not matter if he is aware of what might happen, that has no bearing on whether or not it is legal or ethical.

 

[gitana1]

In response to this policy language:
Each United Carrier reserves the right to change or modify any of its conditions of contract with or without notice to ticketed passengers.

These are often included in consumer contracts and are almost NEVER upheld by a court when its a business versus consumer situation. There are so many doctrines, common law principles, and UCC provisions that apply here it's difficult to get into it too much.

First is unconscionability. This is from the Restatement (second) of Contracts and is virtually identical to UCC section 2-302 if you are in a UCC state.


There are two types:
Procedural Unconscionability - examples: inconspicuous print, complex legal language, disparity of sophistication, lack of time, imbalance in bargaining power, non-negotiable terms
Substantive Unconscionability - grossly one-sided terms, large disparity between parties rights under the contract

IMO both of these exist in this situation. A contract of adhesion (take it or leave it) can not just say one party has all the rights and the other party agrees by purchasing our product. I know they often DO say that, but legally, they CANNOT be enforced that way.

Not to mention all the other legal contract issues that arise by this clause...one side can not modify a contract without new consideration between the parties; there are notice requirements that cannot be contracted around; the pre-existing duty rule; and even more equitable remedies to prevent injustice.

I know contract language often states broad terms, but that's not how contract law works in reality. Companies try to (and do) bully the little man all the time, but legal remedies are available.

More information on contracts of adhesion and the doctrine of unconscionabily: http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/...law/unconscionability-and-adhesion-contracts/

More on sales contract modification https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-209 http://contracts.lawyers.com/contracts-basics/contract-modification.html

More on pre-existing duty rule http://dictionary.findlaw.com/definition/preexisting-duty-rule.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-existing_duty_rule

TLDR: A judge will not uphold a contractual clause that allows one-sided changes or modifications to the contract just because they say they can in the contract and a consumer made a purchase.

And now I remember why I despised taking contract law classes for a year LOL.

God bless you. Adhesion contract popped into my mind from contracts class but man you have a lot of info here!!! Much more than what was in my brain.

Do you think the rank and file employees at the time would know that?

The people in charge sure would.

Agreed! I also often wonder where does common sense, logic, self-preservation and personal responsibility come in? Jeezopeez! Common sense and logic as in don't mess with someone who can do you harm whether it be a bouncer to throw you out, a law enforcement officer who can arrest you or the person who serves or makes your food. Seriously. Don't poke the bear and then cry victim.

He sounded belligerent before he was touched.

I am in no way condoning how it was handled, but he has to take some responsibility. He could have (and still be righteously po'd) left under his own power with dignity and any tiny sympathy for him just 'flew' out the window.

Because oh, what perfect timing! ::::


"You can drag me down, I'm not going" It's on the news NOW - Video with sound HIS VOICE. HIS responsibility.

Be careful what you wish for.

Yes it is interesting how ALL people interpret anyone's behavior

I would feel the same way. Sorry old woman, you took a chance and lost. - Not YOU drjones, lol. I'm an old lady.Be smart, don't poke the bear. *shrugs* Personal responsibility, self-preservation. I

Of course, some people welcome a situation such as this seeing it as a fat ole' pay day.

Yup. Don't poke the bear. You never know how it might react. That advice was for United though. Because the dude who got manhandled off the plane? He's going to get a payout. The losers here are United. Big time. They messed with the wrong guy and it is costing them massively. (And I am so glad it is).

That is your assumption that he mentioned he was a doctor because he "thought it made him more important that other passengers".

Regardless, whether or not you have any sympathy for this guy has no bearing on whether or not what happened was legally defensible or morally correct.

I probably would have done the same thing he did up to the point where they were clearly about to put their hands on me, then I would have agreed to leave.

It is interesting to read how some people interpret his behavior and the conclusions they draw, I have to wonder if people would feel the same way if it was an old woman the same age as him.

I'd be interested in seeing how they'd feel if it happened to them. It's easy to scream about it being logical for a person who has paid for his trip, traveled to the airport, gone through security and bag checks, etc., to calmly get up and depart when the airline decides someone else should have the right to take his place, but it's quite different when it happens to you.

Traveling is stressful. In our economy, many don't have the luxury of missing appointments, days of work, client meetings or losing out on days of vacation just because the airline is greedy.

I think an analogy would be for some of these people to go into a restaurant after standing in a line for a long time, pay for and get their food, be ravenously hungry and sit down to eat only to have it yanked out of their hands and be told, "sorry, that food is for someone else. But you can come back another time and the meal will be on us." Let's see how rational and logical it would be to just calmly get up and leave at that moment.

It is insane that a business is able to do something like that to paying customers. And in a lawsuit, I think they'd lose.

 

[CARIIS]

Airline not forgiven but new info. Doc and his wife initially accepted the 800 but when they found out they could not get home changed their mind


http://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news...er-outrage-over-booted-passenger-919062083682

 

[Hiandmighty]

Doesn't change anything.

 

[CARIIS]

Doesn't change anything.

I
agree

 

[musicaljoke]

One thing this fiasco highlights is how some people feel so bullied or intimidated by the airline industry that they'd be willing to forgo their plans to whatever special event is at the other end of the flight ... job interviews, medical appointments, weddings, graduations, sport events, or what have you. Sometimes those events can't be bought for any price. The practice of randomly selecting customers to turf off the plane is morally reprehensible.

Usually it costs the traveller taxi fares, car rental deposits, hotel cancellation fees, and the difficulty of finding a local hotel at night.

Maybe this case will make passengers bolder to speak out against airline bullying. I guess we'll know when more cases like this start popping up.

 

[musicaljoke]

What is now really pissing me off is how they are now exposing his past records. (medical?)

Does this mean they will now expose the crew's and employees past records for everyone to see?
How dare them, so inconsiderate. Hasn't United already done enough to this guy?

MOO

Media spin. I wouldn't be surprised if United Way's insurer is working overtime to spin it that the Dr. deserved this treatment.

 

[FelicityLemon]

I've been bumped from one flight and one paid-for reserved train seat for a long-planned trip. Each was disappointing of course, but not worth causing a scene, throwing a tantrum, etc. because it wasn't the fault of the flight attendants or the train attendant or the other passengers and it wouldn't have changed anything for the better. I sucked it up and considered it a pay-it-forward that someone else could get on their way to something life changing perhaps or even something that was just plain silly fun. Stuff happens. Good stuff happens to me far more than negative; maybe it's the way I view it. Not saying mean people don't try their best to be nasty or hurtful, they do.

I'm pretty sure that not many people like having to tell a passenger they have to leave their flight or trip. I handled each episode in a different way and none involved having a tantrum.

The older I get, the less of a shrinking violet I am (obviously) but I pick my battles and choose not to add unnecessary stress to myself by getting angry about something that's not life-changing. There are many other things in the world that deserve people's anger and action.

How we handle disappointments affects our health and general happiness. I don't want to have a stroke or a heart attack or cause someone else misery by being a jerk myself.

It's all well and good to be right legally, but it doesn't mean **** in reality. This guy's reality was physical damage, he embarrassed himself, some of his past deeds have been published for all who cares to read about them.

He may have been legally within his rights, but it didn't matter at the moment. Some will say that his probable huge payoff will make it better. Not worth it to me. No amount of money would make me want to risk being physically harmed even if it was incidental.

We're all individuals who have different thoughts on what is right for ourselves.

eace:

 

[HMSHood]

I suspect it will still be being discussed in business textbooks 30 years from now as an example of how to turn a minor problem into a PR catastrophe.

No doubt about that. One giant Charlie Foxtrot!

 

[GA_Peach]

Yes, of course. But again... common sense. I can be 100% in the right, but if it's going to get physical, I'm outa there before I get hurt. There are other ways to handle legal rights, disappointment, annoyance and inconvenience, but if the immediate situation tells me I might get manhandled... worse yet, if I tell people I'm aware it can get physical ("drag me down, I'm not going" etc.) if I continue to do what I'm going, I can't say I wasn't aware.

Not sure if I'm explaining that well, sorry

Again, I don't agree with how it was handled, but he could have avoided it.

It's like in driving who has the right of way - the little smart car vs a 10-ton semi - I'm the little guy and it's my right of way, but I kinda know who's going to get creamed if I try to engage that trucker.

And yet United had no right to assault him. He did not have to relinquish his seat. United/security are the ones who got aggressive and physical. I wouldn't want my kids to do anything that was requested of them, and this situation is no different. Based on the legal analysis that I have read United did not have any standing to remove him from the flight. I have not seen a single attorney say that United was legally allowed to do any of what they did. That doesn't account for the moral or ethical obligations.