United, again.

[rookiepilot]

http://www.courier-journal.com/story/ne ... 100274374/

Story seems to be this: Flight overbooked, but they still let too many people board the flight and realized too late their wasn't not enough space for a standby flight crew. Came on plane, raised offer for volunteers, still no takers for 4 seats needed. Said computer would choose and those 4 would have to leave the plane. One guy refuse, so security came on -- well look at the guy's face. Well done, United.

They made a mistake, just raise the offer a little more and 4 would have volunteered. Nope, got turn into an issue. Sure that's fine with most people. Sad.

[Canoehead]

I wonder if they do rock-paper-scissors amongst the DH crew to determine who's going to sit in that seat?

Seriously, if that were the situation, my crew wouldn't be deadheading on that flight.

[rookiepilot]

One can argue about the "right" they have to do what they did. Of course they did -- Passenger was non compliant, period. Under the rules, security can beat the snot out of you for that. You do what you're told. I wouldn't argue, myself. I value my health, thank you.

But United is getting absolutely creamed on Twitter this morning. Millions more in bad publicity. A lot more expensive wouldn't you say, than offering say $1500 to get a couple of people to willingly leave. I wonder about their upper management and the my way or the highway attitude.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/videos-show ... -1.3362174

This one appears to quote the guy was dragged off the plane unconscious.

[GyvAir]

They had another flight on that route 4 hours later. Why not just bump people from that one to get their crew to Louisville? Duty times, I suppose.
I'll bet there would be people on the earlier flight that would take the $800 and a seat on the later flight. Much better to bump some passengers from the later flight ahead of time than to pry people from their seats, even if they do go more willingly than that.
Just about anything would have been better than how they managed that situation.

[telex]

Passenger was non compliant, period. Under the rules, security can beat the snot out of you for that.

Can you direct me to the rule that states what you have posted?

[rookiepilot]

Passenger was non compliant, period. Under the rules, security can beat the snot out of you for that.

Can you direct me to the rule that states what you have posted?

Gee, I don't know. I don't read anything that any government agency has had any problem with how this or other similar incidents are handled. Non - compliance seems to mean a response by any means necessary. Isn't it all good then?

['97 Tercel]

What?

[rookiepilot]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurabegle ... b2c75d4de1

A contrary example -- great PR story from a horrible series of delays on Delta.

Just interesting to me how 2 different companies handle their issues. I recently flew Delta 4 legs to the US right after that big winter storm. There were a few issues and delays, they handled them not only professionally but extremely politely. I was quite impressed actually.

[ehbuddy]

They are licensed as a service provider and that person paid for his seat. Unless he was causing problems or he became a flight risk he had no reason to be removed from the airplane......he will sue for assault and he will win and United airlines can go @#$! themselves. I know a fellow Pilot that has had more grief flying on United than any other company.

So the next time you and your spouse are dining at a restaurant and while you are eating the cops come and drag your wife away from the table because they needed an extra spot for an employee to eat.....................and then later at the Movies the husband gets dragged out........

[telex]

Gee, I don't know. I don't read anything that any government agency has had any problem with how this or other similar incidents are handled. Non - compliance seems to mean a response by any means necessary. Isn't it all good then?

No, it is not all good then.

You said security can beat the snot out of a non compliant passenger under the rules.

Can you quote the rule you referred to that says beating the snot out of a non-compliant passenger is all good then?

[rookiepilot]

Gee, I don't know. I don't read anything that any government agency has had any problem with how this or other similar incidents are handled. Non - compliance seems to mean a response by any means necessary. Isn't it all good then?

No, it is not all good then.

You said security can beat the snot out of a non compliant passenger under the rules.

Can you quote the rule you referred to that says beating the snot out of a non-compliant passenger is all good then?

Tell you what. Find me one instance where an airline (or their airport security) was formally investigated and charged for how they handled a non-complaint passenger in a similar situation.

[telex]

You said security can beat the snot out of a passenger under the rules and you can't quote the rule?

If you're full of sh*t just say so. Easier for everybody. All good then?

[rookiepilot]

You said security can beat the snot out of a passenger under the rules and you can't quote the rule?

If you're full of sh*t just say so. Easier for everybody. All good then?

Brilliant response! Such intelligence.

I suggest Google for to get the answers you need. It's not that difficult. Good luck!

[telex]

So you can't quote the rule you said allows security to beat the snot out of passengers?

It is a simple solution.

Quote the rule you said which allows security to beat the snot out of passengers or just say you are full of sh*t.

It's not that difficult according to you.

[CpnCrunch]

It wasn't United security, it was the Chicago police (the word "police" on the back of their vests is a hint).

Still, United is one of the shittiest airlines in my experience. Our of 2 flights I had with them, the gear wouldn't go up on one, and they didn't take enough fuel on the second (couldn't hold at SFO, and had to divert to Sacramento. Yeah, that surely saved them money).

[rookiepilot]

So you can't quote the rule you said allows security to beat the snot out of passengers?

It is a simple solution.

Quote the rule you said which allows security to beat the snot out of passengers or just say you are full of sh*t.

It's not that difficult according to you.

https://www.google.ca/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=jbz ... =ssl#spf=1

[telex]

I'll assume you're just full of sh*t at this point.

[ehbuddy]

they may be Friendly in the Skies but on the ground between broken musical instruments, lost and destroyed luggage and beating paying passengers they ought to rethink the slogan........

[rookiepilot]

https://twitter.com/NickMordo/status/851456101270908931

https://twitter.com/RoFlo/status/851454780216143874

Saw these on the twitter feed: (Just a couple of many)

[ehbuddy]

this is how we do things here at UNITED AIRLINES..........we are not going until you have finally been dragged off of the plane