Good News - You Probably Won't be Bumped if Flying United

After this PR disaster I'd say the chances of United removing you from the plane because of overbooking is nil.

How pissed would you be if you got bumped from a plane and missed your cruise? I didn't even know this was possible. I thought they always offered more and more money until someone volunteered to give up their seat. Live and learn.

Especially since this wasn't due to overbooking. They had 4 employees show up at the gate saying they had to be on the flight as they were working a different flight out of Louisville the next day.

Once a passenger is seated, they shouldn't be removed for administrative reasons. This wasn't denied boarding (they were already boarded) and it wasn't overbooking as it was non-revenue employees, this was an administration issue for United as they had crew that waited until the last flight out with no advanced planning. They knew they could just bump paying customers so the lack of organization and planning on United's part to get crew where they were needed is the issue in my view.

They should have told the 4 employees to book a rental car and drive the 5 1/2 hours to Louisville instead of this mess.

Just my opinoin for what it's worth.

After this PR disaster I'd say the chances of United removing you from the plane because of overbooking is nil.

 

How pissed would you be if you got bumped from a plane and missed your cruise? I didn't even know this was possible. I thought they always offered more and more money until someone volunteered to give up their seat. Live and learn.

It seems that there is a limit set by Congress of $1300. A news article said that United offered $800 and $1000, but did not use the max limit of $1300. United decided to go with another option.

I do like to get to the cruise port a day or 2 early. But not all cruises have that option.

It seems that there is a limit set by Congress of $1300. A news article said that United offered $800 and $1000, but did not use the max limit of $1300. United decided to go with another option.

 

I do like to get to the cruise port a day or 2 early. But not all cruises have that option.

Why on earth would congress have set a limit on the maximum amount an airline can offer? Sounds like the result of an airline lobbying effort so they use the excuse "It's not our fault, we're legally prohibited from offering more than $1300". Seems to me what's best for the public is for airlines to be required to up the offer until someone accepts.

Not sure why the employees couldn't have ridden in the cockpit. My daughter did once when the plane she was on was full and volunteers were given the option.

Mind, it was pre 9/11.

It seems that there is a limit set by Congress of $1300. A news article said that United offered $800 and $1000, but did not use the max limit of $1300. United decided to go with another option.

 

I do like to get to the cruise port a day or 2 early. But not all cruises have that option.

We always fly in the day before. Last time I few United they were "overbooked" and needed 8 volunteers to take the next flight. They offered up to $1200 + hotel and food vouchers. I don't understand how airlines can possibly over book in today's world.

Airlines have the legal authority to remove a passenger for any reason. I know we live in an environment of deregulation, but this is an area where some regulations may be necessary to protect passengers.

Why on earth would congress have set a limit on the maximum amount an airline can offer? Sounds like the result of an airline lobbying effort so they use the excuse "It's not our fault, we're legally prohibited from offering more than $1300". Seems to me what's best for the public is for airlines to be required to up the offer until someone accepts.

I believe that is the minimum, not the maximum, if one is involuntary bumped because of an oversold flight. In this case it appears as though overbooking wasn't the issue - but clearing space for crew traveling to work another flight. Not sure if United is legally able to involuntary bump someone in such a scenario - but regardless if they could, they definitely should have kept raising the incentive until people volunteered to be bumped. Penny wise, pound foolish.

Not sure why the employees couldn't have ridden in the cockpit. My daughter did once when the plane she was on was full and volunteers were given the option.

Mind, it was pre 9/11.

Probably not room for more than one and that seat may have already been filled.

United should have purchased tickets for their employees on another airline that was flying to Louisville :-)

Not sure why the employees couldn't have ridden in the cockpit. My daughter did once when the plane she was on was full and volunteers were given the option.

Mind, it was pre 9/11.

It has been also mentioned that they could have rented a car for the employees and let them drive the four hours. Probably some Union violation but this doesn't make United popular and the CEO's comments have made it worse.

I thought this is the CRUISING on CELEBRITY board. When did it turn into the FLYING on UNITED board?

This incident is going to end up costing them far more in lost customers, and in the eventual confidential settlement with the doctor who was injured while being removed from his seat.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

It has implications on cruising on Celebrity if you're flying on United. I know I won't be.

The stock price of United Continental Holdings Inc. fell dramatically on Tuesday as the fallout continues over the airline’s handling of a passenger being dragged from one of its US flights.

If the airline’s stock ends the day carrying these losses, the company will lose about $830 million from its market value, MarketWatch

This incident is going to end up costing them far more in lost customers, and in the eventual confidential settlement with the doctor who was injured while being removed from his seat.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

I'm not an attorney so maybe an attorney can answer; What would be the passengers legal claim? The airline has the right to remove a passenger as noted in the passenger contract. Three passengers who where asked to leave did so without incident. This passenger refused to leave. He could have stopped resisting at any point, but continued to resist. His actions contributed, at least in part, to his injuries.

What I find most disturbing is United's response to the situation. They should have reached out to the passenger ASAP and made a sincere offer and apology. Their responses have only fostered more ill will. I also believe that if they "just followed procedures" as the CEO argued, they need to change those procedures! People react in different ways to situations and this can be based on many factors. Staff needs to be trained to understand differences and apply appropriate procedures depending on circumstances. United is wrong on many levels, but the passengers does have some responsibility in this case. Even though United might be within their legal rights they should still reach out and get a settlement. A legal case would only add to their PR fiasco.

It's the CEO's response that has done the real damage, claiming the crew had no alternative. Clearly untrue; just offer more $$$$ until someone volunteers. Bumping at the gate is one thing; removing passengers from their seat is unacceptable.

It has implications on cruising on Celebrity if you're flying on United. I know I won't be.

We were booked on Continental by Celebrity for an Hawaiian cruise. The day we flew from LHR, was the day that the amalgation with United took place. It meant that we were unable to check in on line the previous day and there was a huge queue when we were at check in on the following day.

It was NOT our option to choose to fly United.

Fortunately, our flight arrived into LA on time.

It's the CEO's response that has done the real damage, claiming the crew had no alternative. Clearly untrue; just offer more $$$$ until someone volunteers. Bumping at the gate is one thing; removing passengers from their seat is unacceptable.

Especially since they were removing passengers to accommodate their own employees. This was not an overbooked flight as some defenders have been asserting. All of the paying customers had their seats and had taken their seats. This was done to fly United personnel instead of the customers.

It seems that there is a limit set by Congress of $1300. A news article said that United offered $800 and $1000, but did not use the max limit of $1300. United decided to go with another option.

 

I do like to get to the cruise port a day or 2 early. But not all cruises have that option.

Actually there is not an upper limit set by congress.

It's the CEO's response that has done the real damage, claiming the crew had no alternative. Clearly untrue; just offer more $$$$ until someone volunteers. Bumping at the gate is one thing; removing passengers from their seat is unacceptable.

They also could have done what I saw on a Delta flight a few years ago. Announce to the passengers that one of the passengers that was bumped has refused to leave the plane. As a result we will remain here, a the gate, until he departs the plane. Amazing how fast the passengers turn on the person that refuses to leave in that situation. Within 2-3 minutes half the plane was chanting "leave the plane". The person left after 5 minutes.

They should have told the 4 employees to book a rental car and drive the 5 1/2 hours to Louisville instead of this mess.

Pure speculation here, but in that scenario the crew may not have been legally rested to operate their assigned flight the following day. Their legally-required rest period wouldn't have begun until whatever time they finally arrived in Louisville that night.

But operational procedures aside, United has a big PR blunder on their hands in this social media driven world.

Actually there is not an upper limit set by congress.

Apparently the "upper limit" is for what an airline must be *required* to pay for involuntarily bumping someone.

I assume that this has some legal reasoning such that if they offer the "max required", they can't be sued, or something like that (?).

They can certainly *offer* more to entice volunteers.

And, importantly, to avoid horrendously negative publicity.

Whether this specific situation - passengers already in seats, not really "overbooked', just 'needing' the seats for some employees - fits criteria for involuntarily bumping... ??

It has been also mentioned that they could have rented a car for the employees and let them drive the four hours. Probably some Union violation but this doesn't make United popular and the CEO's comments have made it worse.

Not only union contract but FAA crew rest requirements and hours of service.

The flight was not oversold, it was operational/crew planning issue.

The four were marked as must carry by operations, four paying passengers were not going to fly no matter what.

UA followed the passengers contract of carriage, but still enough blame to go around

UA not solving the issue before boarding started

Excessive use of force by Chicago Aviation Police

Passenger refusing a lawful order from Flight Crew AND then a Police Officer

Pure speculation here, but in that scenario the crew may not have been legally rested to operate their assigned flight the following day. Their legally-required rest period wouldn't have begun until whatever time they finally arrived in Louisville that night.

 

But operational procedures aside, United has a big PR blunder on their hands in this social media driven world.

Little sympathy for United's lack of planning. They bank on being able to do this to their passengers.