United flight

[westend1]

I think he guy should have left the plane when he was ordered to do so, but what the eff was United thinking?  The guy bought a valid ticket and wanted to be on the flight.  I think United is obliged at that point to keep offering more money until someone agrees to leave,  Thoughts?

[Hagar]

2 minutes ago, westend1 said:

I think he guy should have left the plane when he was ordered to do so, but what the eff was United thinking?  The guy bought a valid ticket and wanted to be on the flight.  I think United is obliged at that point to keep offering more money until someone agrees to leave,  Thoughts?

Yes, he should've got off.  Since he refused, United should have thrown out more dough.  It'd been a lot cheaper than this deal is going to cost them.

[BS Wildcats]

Exactly what the airlines get for overbooking flights.  They knew that they had a crew needing to catch this flight, it should have been allowed for.. According to what I've read, their business will suffer from lost revenue due to the Asian market not doing business with them any longer.

[LumRaiderFan]

51 minutes ago, westend1 said:

I think he guy should have left the plane when he was ordered to do so, but what the eff was United thinking?  The guy bought a valid ticket and wanted to be on the flight.  I think United is obliged at that point to keep offering more money until someone agrees to leave,  Thoughts?

Agree...their fault, their obligation to fix it. 

[PhatMack19]

1 hour ago, REBgp said:

Yes, he should've got off.  Since he refused, United should have thrown out more dough.  It'd been a lot cheaper than this deal is going to cost them.

Their stock ended the day down 1.1% which is around $250m.  It was way worse earlier in the day at $1 billion in lost value. 

 

United handled this poorly, but the guy should have obeyed the cops and gotten off before he was forcibly removed.  I agree with west end that United should have kept upping the price until someone aggreed.  Everyone has a price.

[texanabroad]

Why should the guy get off the plane? On what grounds were they removing him? He had purchased a ticket to board the plane. United had accepted the ticket when they allowed him to board. He wasn't a threat/danger to the flight.  The fault is entirely United's. If they had done this before boarding, it may have been different. There is no excuse whatsoever for this. 

[BS Wildcats]

5 hours ago, texanabroad said:

Why should the guy get off the plane? On what grounds were they removing him? He had purchased a ticket to board the plane. United had accepted the ticket when they allowed him to board. He wasn't a threat/danger to the flight.  The fault is entirely United's. If they had done this before boarding, it may have been different. There is no excuse whatsoever for this. 

Exactly, like I said, it's totally their fault for overbooking the flight.

[LumRaiderFan]

Agree it was United's fault, but just get off the plane and plead your case later...don't make them drag you down the aisle like a 5 year old.

[PhatMack19]

 

 

[Big girl]

16 hours ago, REBgp said:

Yes, he should've got off.  Since he refused, United should have thrown out more dough.  It'd been a lot cheaper than this deal is going to cost them.

I agree

[Tigers2010]

I am so proud of you guys. This thread shows we all (Republican and Democrat) can be reasonable people. We have accurately identified the issue and placed blame on correct source of misconduct. Good for us. Merica 

[BS Wildcats]

Why should he have gotten off the plane?

[baddog]

Years ago, I went to a monster truck show at the old fairgrounds in Beaumont. I took my oldest son. When we got there, we found out they had double sold my seats. The other people bought the same tickets as mine but they bought them earlier than me so they got to sit there. I wanted to absolutely kill someone but I held back for my kid. We sat in some worse seats but sat through it. If we had sat in our seats before being confronted with the screw up, someone would have had to drag me out of my seat, therefore, I have mixed emotions about this. United screwed the pooch on this one, but I don't blame the guy for not getting up.

[TxHoops]

On 4/11/2017 at 6:57 PM, REBgp said:

Yes, he should've got off.  Since he refused, United should have thrown out more dough.  It'd been a lot cheaper than this deal is going to cost them.

Bingo.  The cheap bastards really deserve what they are getting.  How much cheaper would a couple grand in vouchers and a couple of free flights to Hawaii have been vs what they are going through now?  Greed can be crippling, which is what is dripping all over this story.  

[Englebert]

Greed (as with need) is the mother of invention. Stifling greed is crippling. It all depends on the situation and the circumstances.

Both sides are wrong. This has nothing to do with capitalism vs socialism, or any label anyone wants to attribute. The man was a total a-hole to defy authority. At the same time, the company should never have the power to forcibly remove him after he purchased a ticket. (Granted, I don't know the rules of the ticket he purchased.) It is now the public's duty to decide if the status quo can continue. That is what democracy is all about. I have no faith in the public ever since I've discovered that the public will give up their privacy in favor of cheaper rates. (If you don't think what I'm currently writing is being saved by the ISP and the NSA, then you don't have a clue as to modern company and government surveillance...all with public consent). I have a feeling the same thing will happen here...people will willingly purchase tickets subject to "bumping" to save a few bucks. We, the public, have a unique opportunity to disavow airlines from offering tickets subject to "bumping", or we can settle for this practice in order to save some money. Sadly, I know which we will pick.

[Hagar]

I'm surprised no one would even take the $800.  A whole plane full of people?  I bet if it was a flight out of McCarran in Las Vegas folks would be jumping on that $800 lol.

[LumRaiderFan]

10 hours ago, REBgp said:

I'm surprised no one would even take the $800.  A whole plane full of people?  I bet if it was a flight out of McCarran in Las Vegas folks would be jumping on that $800 lol.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

You would think this guy would have taken it...from the article:

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 that while his medical license was suspended, Dao "made a killing" as a World Series of Poker player, earning a total of $234,664.

Also from the article:

It took virtually no time for his hometown paper, 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, to point out that Dao, a father of five and grandfather who went to medical school in Vietnam, had his medical license suspended for about 10 years for illegally prescribing painkillers, including to a patient in exchange for sex. It's all a matter of public record.

[pdawg119]

What United did basically gave me another reason why I prefer to fly Southwest.

[texanabroad]

10 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

You would think this guy would have taken it...from the article:

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 that while his medical license was suspended, Dao "made a killing" as a World Series of Poker player, earning a total of $234,664.

Also from the article:

It took virtually no time for his hometown paper, 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, to point out that Dao, a father of five and grandfather who went to medical school in Vietnam, had his medical license suspended for about 10 years for illegally prescribing painkillers, including to a patient in exchange for sex. It's all a matter of public record.

I don't understand how any of this is relevant. What difference does it make what his profession was or his past history? What if he were a school teacher or garbage collector? It really doesn't matter. United screwed up and should have NEVER used force to remove him. They should have kept increasing their offer until he or someone else accepted it. Had they been on the ball and not allowed him to board to begin with, there would never had been a story. They were incompetent and they are paying for it, and it will cost way more than $800.

[tvc184]

2 hours ago, texanabroad said:

I don't understand how any of this is relevant. What difference does it make what his profession was or his past history? What if he were a school teacher or garbage collector? It really doesn't matter. United screwed up and should have NEVER used force to remove him. They should have kept increasing their offer until he or someone else accepted it. Had they been on the ball and not allowed him to board to begin with, there would never had been a story. They were incompetent and they are paying for it, and it will cost way more than $800.

It is not relevant in relation to United's actions. 

It makes some of us feel better that a person that is probably a dirtbag got what he deserved.

It is like seeing a couple of guys assault someone and it is clear that the assault was a crime... but finding out that the guy that was beaten was a child molester and ruined the lives of several children. It is better to see a vile person suffer than a truly nice person. 

Maybe you could reduce it to one word... karma. 

Legally? No bearing. Feeling? Good riddance.

[bullets13]

On April 12, 2017 at 11:10 AM, BS Wildcats said:

Why should he have gotten off the plane?

It says in the fine print that nobody reads that you have to get off the flight if they need the seats to get employees to another town to work the next day.  I don't like the rule, but we all agree to it when we purchase airline tickets.  They handled it very, very poorly, but they had the right to remove him from the plane.  

[BS Wildcats]

18 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

It says in the fine print that nobody reads that you have to get off the flight if they need the seats to get employees to another town to work the next day.  I don't like the rule, but we all agree to it when we purchase airline tickets.  They handled it very, very poorly, but they had the right to remove him from the plane.  

They should have known they needed the seats before they loaded the plane.  All airlines may need to review policy of overbooking flights.

[bullets13]

17 minutes ago, BS Wildcats said:

They should have known they needed the seats before they loaded the plane.  All airlines may need to review policy of overbooking flights.

Agreed 1000%

[Hagar]

I don't know the rules for overbooking, which is legal btw, but just my opinion, once a person is seated, that should be it - game over.  Once seated, then the Airline should be responsible for making an offer that someone will take.  They make money overbooking, so sometimes they should have to bite the bullet.  In this case, United will bite the MOAB.

[texanabroad]

2 hours ago, bullets13 said:

It says in the fine print that nobody reads that you have to get off the flight if they need the seats to get employees to another town to work the next day.  I don't like the rule, but we all agree to it when we purchase airline tickets.  They handled it very, very poorly, but they had the right to remove him from the plane.