United Airlines - Passenger removal

[arfurclue]

Got bored reading that.

It was a cunts truck what they did and their shareholders are now $550m worse off. Which is excellent.

Not the passengers fault that the airline fucked up and needed to move staff.

i get that this is a typo - but somehow it is all the better for it, even if I don't quite understand what it means...

 

[ChicagoBlue]

Got bored reading that.

It was a cunts truck what they did and their shareholders are now $550m worse off. Which is excellent.

Not the passengers fault that the airline fucked up and needed to move staff.

Sorry it bored you. Facts are hard.

I don't know what a cunts truck is and the shareholders are now 1% worse off.

Is it the company or the company's shareholders you are mad at? Confused? You seem to be lashing out at something that didn't happen to you and happened thousands of miles away. I never thought of you as one of those Internet outrage guys.

You are right, it is not the passengers fault that the situation required his removal. His actions thereafter ARE his fault. THAT is where the problem occurred. That said, I will reiterate that I feel the actions of one of the officers on the scene made this the problem it has become, even though UAL is going to bear the brunt of his actions. That officer has been suspended, btw.

 

[SWP's back]

I have learnt today that the airline industry have laws to screw the passenger to help maximise profits.

I think this thread has proven to everyone what airline professionals at some airlines think of the passengers.

Best thing do is avoid those airlines like the plague and fly why better carriers. I'm a Qatar Airways Gold Card holder anyway as I fly a lot with work but you never get this sort of crap on their aircraft.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

Spot on.

We're going to need more tin foil!!

 

[cucumberman]

Sorry it bored you. Facts are hard.

I don't know what a cunts truck is and the shareholders are now 1% worse off.

Is it the company or the company's shareholders you are mad at? Confused? You seem to be lashing out at something that didn't happen to you and happened thousands of miles away. I never thought of you as one of those Internet outrage guys.

You are right, it is not the passengers fault that the situation required his removal. His actions thereafter ARE his fault. THAT is where the problem occurred. That said, I will reiterate that I feel the actions of one of the officers on the scene made this the problem it has become, even though UAL is going to bear the brunt of his actions. That officer has been suspended, btw.

You seem to be holding onto the idea that the law was correctly applied here. What do you think of this analysis by the law professor?
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/united-cites-wrong-rule-for-illegally-de-boarding-passenger/
I think it's a good piece.

If the law was applied incorrectly would you revise your stance?

 

[ChicagoBlue]

I think this thread has proven to everyone what airline professionals at some airlines think of the passengers.

Yep, that's the big takeaway! Huh????

Best thing do is avoid those airlines like the plague and fly why better carriers. I'm a Qatar Airways Gold Card holder anyway as I fly a lot with work but you never get this sort of crap on their aircraft.

No, you're right, the airline reserves their abuse for their employees and citizens.

I'm glad your employer pays for you to travel around the Middle East in business class. I'm sure you worry about IDBs all the time!! I suppose if United Airlines got billions in government subsidies and virtually free fuel at their hubs, we could run half empty aircraft all over the world and not have these problems. Alas, we live in the real capitalistic world in America and our planes are so full it sometimes requires asking a passenger to volunteer to take another flight, which is what this guy did before he decided he wasn't going to do it.

I'm glad you enjoy premium status on a high quality carrier. Good for you. I wish my carrier enjoyed subsidies and government protections so that we could fly even more, bigger aircraft and never have to turn away a single passenger. Until then, I guess crap will happen.

 

[SWP's back]

Sorry it bored you. Facts are hard.

I don't know what a cunts truck is and the shareholders are now 1% worse off.

Is it the company or the company's shareholders you are mad at? Confused? You seem to be lashing out at something that didn't happen to you and happened thousands of miles away. I never thought of you as one of those Internet outrage guys.

You are right, it is not the passengers fault that the situation required his removal. His actions thereafter ARE his fault. THAT is where the problem occurred. That said, I will reiterate that I feel the actions of one of the officers on the scene made this the problem it has become, even though UAL is going to bear the brunt of his actions. That officer has been suspended, btw.

It's great that half a billion dollars was wiped of the stock as it may actually lead to situations like this not occurring.

If United had the systems in place so as not to fuck up and overbook a flight (with solely passengers or passengers alongside crew needing to be somewhere else) then fee paying customers may not be treated like dirt in the future.

It's going to take a hell of a lot of flights and profits to make up for the loss of market capitalisation this event triggered. Not to mention the lack of goodwill towards the company and future customers voting with their feet for future flights.

 

[SWP's back]

You seem to be holding onto the idea that the law was correctly applied here. What do you think of this analysis by the law professor?
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/united-cites-wrong-rule-for-illegally-de-boarding-passenger/
I think it's a good piece.

If the law was applied incorrectly would you revise your stance?

I look forward to the lawsuit.

I only hope he doesn't settle out of court.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

You seem to be holding onto the idea that the law was correctly applied here. What do you think of this analysis by the law professor?
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/united-cites-wrong-rule-for-illegally-de-boarding-passenger/
I think it's a good piece.

If the law was applied incorrectly would you revise your stance?

I think he is standing on a technicality. If this goes to court and his interpretation stands, then the entire airline business will change....which is why I think it is wrong. Even so, this went so far beyond the DB issue once he decided not to comply with law enforcement.

Like I said, I've said my bit. Everyone has their opinion, so I'll bow out of the arguing semantics.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

It's great that half a billion dollars was wiped of the stock as it may actually lead to situations like this not occurring.

If United had the systems in place so as not to fuck up and overbook a flight (with solely passengers or passengers alongside crew needing to be somewhere else) then fee paying customers may not be treated like dirt in the future.

It's going to take a hell of a lot of flights and profits to make up for the loss of market capitalisation this event triggered. Not to mention the lack of goodwill towards the company and future customers voting with their feet for future flights.

Do you even understand what you are talking about? I give the fuck up!! You are talking bullshit, and gloating about your ignorance.

I'm off to bed. I have to fly a United Airlines aircraft tomorrow. Let the fun begin....