The recent news of a man who got dragged out of the United Airlines flight has been making headlines all over.
I feel that the man should sue the hell out of the company but Some are saying that it was the police, not the airlines who forced the passenger out of the plane, so he cannot sue United.
i would like to know if he has the right to do so.
Any lawyers or informed people here?
All contributions welcomed with a thank you.
The airline should've announced ever increasing compensation for passengers to give up their seats over the intercom, like an auction where the airline is the bidder and all the passengers are sellers:
$400… $500… $600… etc, until they had enough takers.
That would be a fair way to handle the issue rather than punishing a few unlucky individuals at random.
What happens if no one accepts the bids/offers?
It should increase until they had enough takers.
If hypothetically they had no takers at $1,000,000 they should take off and fly the plane to the nearest psychiatric facility.
Well, I heard these compensations are in the form of flight vouchers (in $50, only one can be used each time).
So the value of compensation is not that appealing even for $1m.
I was stating what should've happened, not what did. And I made no mention of vouchers, so cash is implied.
@victorheaven: Was browsing on reddit before, not sure if its true but from what I read. The affected customer has the right to ask for the compensation in cheque form and that the value they need to compensate for is 4x that of the original value.
Either way, I think the way United handled this situation is beyond stupid. If they weren't willing to give up their seats, just find someone else. I don't think there is anywhere that says you have to give up your seat if an attendant asks you.
@ProjectZero: Yeah I read that too. For domestic flights, 4 or more hours delayed until your relocation flight will entitle you to 4 x Cost of One-way ticket
@victorheaven: That's not true. When I lived in USA I took vouchers all the time. I once got $600 to delay a flight to Vegas for 4 hours. That paid for tickets to New Orleans and New York for me and her indoors (from Chicago).
ahhhh ebehyehdehgeawahhshdjfjaadddjdjd sold to the man in the red hat
standing ovation
The bidding should've been the first thing they did.
If that doesn't work then instead of random selection why didn't they check the booking log to see which 4 passengers booked last and ask those 4.
Also, there should be a few spare seats in the cockpit. Why not let the staff use them???
Why should the last 4 bookings be booted? I'd argue that the last 4 bookings would have the most urgent need to travel.
Boot the people who bought the cheapest tickets. Makes sense for the airline to attach conditions to sale fares.
@dinna89: Why should the people who bought the cheapest tickets be booted? I'd argue the cheapest bookings would have the most urgent need to travel.
It's not up to the airline to determine who does and doesn't have a 'legitimate' need to travel… or whose needs are more important than another.
If I recall correctly, the doctor had one of the cheapest tickets - which is why the airline opted to boot him off.
Isn't it possible UA just cherry picked 4, whom they (UA) "thought" the easiest targets ? Whatever they did, It turned out to be disaster. I am much interested in understanding how UA selected those 4.
For same token, I am keen to knowing why UA firstly accepted Mr.Dao's on boarding, but tried to drag him out, after he was seated. Don't forget those four seats were for four internal UA employees. Why is that order of priority ?
"Why should the last 4 bookings be booted? I'd argue that the last 4 bookings would have the most urgent need to travel."
First come first served!
This is no different from booking a table at a restaurant… Once the table is booked, the person who booked first has precedence over any accidental over bookings.
@Wallace: metaphor/simile should be banned from rational argument, it is most often used to draw false equivalances.
Here's a false equivalance that works in my favour. Public transport often has concession fares. In some places, the concessionaire must make their seat available for full fee paying passengers.
Price is a mechanism that you have agreed works (i.e. the bidding)
If the airline have sale fares, it's reasonable that they attach conditions to those fares, one of which may be that you are first to go in the event of an overbooking.
"Public transport often has concession fares. In some places, the concessionaire must make their seat available for full fee paying passengers."
The 4 passengers booted off are full fee passengers while the 4 employees paid ZILCH. The 4 employees must make way, this is the airline's responsibility.
"If the airline have sale fares, it's reasonable that they attach conditions to those fares, one of which may be that you are first to go in the event of an overbooking."
I not aware that the 4 passengers booted off were holding special discounted tickets that hold such conditions.
@Wallace:
Now you've changed the terms of the argument, something else that should be banned
I was engaging in a hypothetical regarding whether a policy of last on first out should be adopted. It should not. I never said it was directly relevant to the OP.
Also, well done on adding another false equivalance, saying that the airline employees were paying nothing. That's not particularly relevant.
When I was in the States flying with Delta from LA to NY they did exactly this.
First they asked for volunteers, then they started making offers, increasing them each time until they had enough people accept.
Blind auction would be good way and probably quicker if they used an app
they did offer a higher value with no takers; they should offer more $ but they probably thought it was quicker to boot someone as the flight must take off at a certain time.
The airline should have kept the passengers waiting until enough volunteers opted for the other flight which would be probably going before this delayed flight
http://www.ladbible.com/more/news-we-spoke-to-a-us-aviation-…
Just saw an article fin ladbible in related to this one
This is the answer to OP's question from David Dao's Lawyer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ptznd10rJ7U
You can sue anyone you like. The trick is winning.
I gather it was the cops that man handled him.
Since it is America, I think it likely he will sue the airline, the airport and the cops.
All three will likely settle for a substantial sum to avoid ongoing adverse media, if nothing else.
If the man wants to go to court to teach them a lesson, I think his case is less straightforward, as the airline can deny to carry anybody they want, and the cops were reasonably measured in the physicality used to remove the man who had become a trespasser when he refused to leave.
But, of course, a jury may look at the airline and cops acting within the law and decide to find against them anyway because the law is an ass.
Yeah. I wish the man will be able to sue the company but as I have read, some are saying that the man does not have any right to do so since the airline's terms and conditions state that they have absolute right to remove any passenger they want, with a valid reason or without.
The plane was delayed 2-3 hours because the situation got out of control as a result of the way the airline and police handled the situation.
Even the airline has admitted the passenger was mistreated. Not sure why you are blaming the victim?
The reason the passenger was in that situation is because the airline purposely over-booked the flight as a result of company policy.
If the airline needed the staff for a flight in another city why did they over-book the flight?
CEO has now taken responsibility for the incident:
“I want you to know that we take full responsibility and we will work to make it right."
I was in an overbooked flight in the states… They offered a a thousand bucks and a holiday to Europe for 2 people for a week (from an airline hub city) for those who were OK for a later flight. No shortage of volunteers.
@tranter: But that's because of the climate we live in. The CEO hardly gonna come out and say: "Nah, stuff that, the passenger was an arsehead!"
@airzone: I'd fight someone for the perks, not the other way around. You'd see me running from the plane.
I've been offered a first class upgrade to swap flights from London just once in my lifetime, however it meant losing a day in Hong Kong on the way home, so I declined. I still regret not taking the upgrade over ten years later, however if money was involved I might have been infinitely more tempted. These days I'd take any upgrade offered LOL.
@airzone: My understanding is they offered $400 and no-one volunteered,They then offered $800 and no-one volunteered. Then they went to a computer to randomly generate seat numbers to be vacated. All to let some staff on who were on standby.
Personally I can't believe they didn't know they needed 4 extra seats before they let people board the plane. If people are stopped at the gate. That's fair game. If you're let on board the plane, settled and seated I don't think you should be forcibly removed unless you have caused an issue that requires you being arrested (Ie drunk, disorderly etc).
Saying "no" to being removed for staff from another plane should not be enough to forcibly remove you. The rest of the "resisting" was after they started removing him. I don't think removing a person to make room for staff is right (volunteers are another matter) If they are willing to pay $800 for a passenger, then book those staff on another airline (probably for cheaper). The PR alone is a nightmare for this situation let alone the legalities and a court suit.
The compensation is in the form of a voucher with a 12 month expiry date, not cash. If it was so crucial for the staff to board, they should have kept increasing the amount until they had volunteers. Should have increased the amount to $5000 if they had to. Instead they chose to have a paying customer dragged out of the plane like a criminal, more or less assaulting him in the process.
United handled the incident horribly and will lose millions over the bad PR. $255 million has been wiped off their market cap, and thousands of people (including large corporates) are cancelling their tickets and vowing not to use them in the future.
The guy was a doctor. He has a responsibility to his patients and probably needed to be on that flight. He was between a rock and a hard place, hence he resisted. Then he was hopelessly assaulted by airport security.
United should just have offered more compensation until someone else voluntarily got off the plane. And this should never happen to seated passengers.
No idea what would happen if he tried to sue…
Well Rocky, all I can say is thank god for social media otherwise United would not be held accountable for their actions that resulted in a paying passenger who had already been allowed to pass the gate and taken a seat in the aircraft to be assaulted and dragged along the ground out of the plane.
Yes, all airlines have terms in the contract regarding seat swapping but they are not all the same. United are now forced to review their terms and policies and make changes to stop this from happening again.
$1000 cash or airline voucher ?
United should have put their staff on FIRST then let passengers board. This is not a uncommon occurrence in the US. They always overbook flights.
Kinda hard when videos and witness accounts of the event has passengers obviously against the airline.
There is no account of how he got back on, so claiming he fought to get back on is a furphy.
Its more likely since he was bloody from their handling and what people guess is concussed, they put him down and didn't watch over him.
Yes Airlines can remove people if they want. But its a policy of more companies now not to do it, as its bad publicity… like this. What they generally do is keep upping the offer for people to volunteer to get off. They didn't here. A $800 VOUCHER obviously wasn't worth it to miss one day.
Was that Delta airlines?
I've read that the other Airlines are better at offers, and some don't do force removals, just keep upping the offer
What rules allow the airline to remove him? The contact of carriage is here: https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriag… have a read through rule 21 "refusal of transport" and explain which rule he broke to allow him to be removed from the flight.
@tranter: "CEO has now taken responsibility for the incident"
That's hilarious. A CEO does not take responsibility for anything but their next 20% pay raise. Remember, when things are going well the CEO claims all responsibility, when they're going badly they always blame someone else.
They are a few more points that most people don't seem to know about that you haven't mentioned
(this is from what i read and may be wrong)
- crew were 5 hours by car from their destination; to start work on a flight leaving 20 hours later. They wouldve had to been paid for the 5 hours travel - airline was been a dick trying to save money and instead cost everyone on that plan a massive inconvenience.
-the money given may have been as $50 vouchers that wouldve required to be used on the same airline
- the airline may refuse compensation because he didn't volunteer
- However the law requires a higher level of cash compensation then the ones being offered (for certain time frames) - airlines ask for volunteers so they can pay lower, also so they can pay in vouchers not cash
- someone reported they said i'll leave for $1600 and the airline manager(?) laughed at them and said no
- airlines can legally bump people the above for oversold flights - however, bit of a grey area as crew aren't sold seats
again… from what i've read and i may have remembered incorrectly
I would hate to be the airline staff who took the vacated seats. Apparently they were shamed by passengers throughout the flight.
@bs0:
Reddit keeps referring to the Department of Transport, where its an involuntary kickoff, like what happened to the 4, its 4x ticket price up to $1,350 in cash/cheque.
Voluntary payments is just trying to go cheap
Side effect of this is everyone flying in the US now knows to hold out until $1,350 is offered as thats likely the cut off point, or for airlines that don't do involuntary kickoffs skys the limit
He has a responsibility to his patients and probably needed to be on that flight.
The Vietnamese-born Kentucky man was convicted on multiple charges of obtaining drugs by fraud in 2004 and was placed on five years’ probation, the Courier-Journal of Louisville reports. The Kentucky medical licensing board investigated Dr Dao after his arrest and found he had become sexually interested in a male patient whom he physically examined, according to the New York Post. The two began a relationship and would often meet for sex in motel rooms. Dr Dao would supply the patient with narcotics in exchange for sexual favours. He eventually made the patient his office manager, but the man quit after Dr Dao made “inappropriate” remarks about him.
@bs0: AFAIK there's a computer generated cap on how much they are allowed to pay them to get them off. In this case I think it's $800. And in this case it's not denied boarding but refuse to transport (since everyone's boarded and seated already), which IMO not compliant with the Condition of Carriage from UA.
@44sunsets: One does not simply take something down from the Internet.
http://web.archive.org/web/20170411191735/http://www.news.co…
Are you for real, a Dick because he refused to get off a flight he had already boarded and a ticket he had presumably paid for. Most passengers don't even know the Airlines have this right. So what if the staff had to crew another plane, do you think that United don't have other staff they can call on if required. This was all about saving money and nothing else. I would object to being booted off a plane for no other reason than to acomodte flight staff for another flight, especially if I was a doctor and was flying in to see patients the next morning. Most of the time passengers are not allowed to board the flight. most of the people here are correct, if you have to get passengers, who have a valid ticket, off a plane up the ante until someone takes the offer. Trust me United will be wishing they did that from the get go.
@tranter: My understanding is that there wans't an overbooking - it was the airline saying so, so that they could justify booting people off the flight.
It was just a fully booked flight where the airline just needed to transport their staff to another city.
This was a total mismanagement of an issue by United airlines that could've been totally avoided.
@tanksinatra: most likely, UA would suffer (actually has suffered) such as loss of thousands of customers, including some corporates, market capitalisation, UA Brand. The legal suit, might end up in millions of compensation.
@Cluster: or they can take all the responsibility then take their $20 million bonus before they leave.
@RockyRaccoon: easier said then done, it might seem you are one of those type who think about the laws before human dignity and morals. No offence to you.
But you're justification is just simply unfair, sure it's the rules and regulation of United Airline but what about the circumstances of that particular person who was force to leave? Which resulted into chaos. He might have a more legitimate reason as to why he refused (according to some he was a doctor) but unfortunately that thought doesn't matter because big companies like United don't give a rats arse even if it was his last chance to say goodbye to a loved one.
I'm sure the Captain or the security police or even the Head flight attendant could've help to find someone who is more suitable to leave. It's not like he did a crime that they needed for him to leave, and don't even say he trespassed, maybe he did gave a reasonable legitimate reason as to why he couldn't leave but obviously Police in America aren't the best at handling such matter without using excessive force, which from my experience they did not handle the arrest correctly.
All in all, United (profanity) up and so did the Airport Police, but for the matter United was thinking about Money first Passenger second, because i am sure they knew they had 4 staff that needed to board the flight but instead overbook, so that is why the CEO probably took full responsibility to it because it was part of their fill in bums on seats first before anything else.
I hope this makes sense, i just woke up still trying to finish my coffee lol
@Peace Maker: It's the American way - If you are in the wrong then incriminate the other party with Ad-hominem style by shaming their character. It works on dumb people, but it still does not make it any more legitimate to forcefully remove this man with brutal assault and bodily harm that was inflicted.
Rocky, you actually got rock in your head :)
Terms and conditions does not trump the actual law of the land. Also you cannot sign away your inalienable rights under the us constitution especially if you are an american citizen.
Trump. Donald Trump
Well i've been feeling pretty alienated lately, especially from whatever rights i do have.
They should have just clipped him with a backing track "take that MF!" BLAM BLAM BLAM!!!
And the plane operator, and it's owner, and it's manufacturer, and the seat manufacturer.
Yeah! The seat was the real culprit in damaging the gentleman's face!!
They failed in their duty of care to provide proper protection and warning labels in the event of a face smashing incident.
And your children and your children's children!
its america, they can sue the air if they want
Can I sue the OP for asking a stupid question?
If it caused emotional distress you'll probably get half a mil
In that case, I'd better start moving my assets off-shore. *gulp*
He'll probably get a better outcome if he plays the sympathy card, e.g. give interviews about how he was manhandled, etc. The bad PR will make United offer him some appeasement.
And this is why I don't watch news.
I've read a lot of people saying that anyone on the plane has to obey their rules, part of an agreement.
But morally I just can't see them not giving a massive payout to the poor guy.
There are rules and common sense, and then there is the art of executing the rules using common sense.
You see a red light at a pedestrian crossing, so you stop the car to let the 69 year old man cross. Before he manages to cross the road the light turns green, so you hit the accelerator and run him over - because the traffic rules state that you can drive when the light turns green…
For a company the size of United, the execution was horrendous regardless of what the terms and conditions are. CEO also managed the situation extremely poorly at the start. It's astonishing really, for a company that size, is there no talent in America? Oh wait, their president is…
It's things like this that makes me glad I'm not American.
those policemen probably a racist
But the passenger wasn't black /sarcasm
But he wasn't white either.
I lost some sympathy for the victim when I heard he played the race card.
@Scrooge McDuck: He is making a complaint and telling the truth: Chinese or Asian people in US is the weakest population, they rarely resist and that's why 3 out of the 4 people that been picked up to leave are Asian.
But the passenger wasn't black /sarcasm
He had black hair!!
those policemen probably a racist
Probably?
Apparently the airline randomly selected 4 unlucky individuals to be bumped. The Police had no hand in choosing those individuals.
But they didn't randomly choose the way he would be treated.
There are a lot of videos on YouTube of passengers of various races ("white" included) being similarly removed by Police from airline seats…
@Scrooge McDuck: I'm sure there are - but given there is ample evidence of systemic racism in the US police force, I can't see why we should give much weight to some youtube videos you've seen…
(see http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/data-police-racial-bi… and the references contained within - 16 of which support the claim that the US police force as an institution is racist, vs 2 which find no evidence).
They probably are, but nothing from the video will point to that conclusion.
SJW GTFO , RREEEEEEEE
They will settle before it gets to court
Looks like the stock market has already punished United's stock. The victim can just sit back with popcorn.
Its popped back up.
I'd be shorting it heavily if I knew how though, its getting big media in China, China has partnership deals with United… so it could be major.
The CEO, has already given a 2nd apology, after he thought he could get away with a weak one earlier.
Probably everything will be sorted out after the CEO eats some more crow.
I'm confused as to how it even got there.
I heard it was about a 5 hour drive, so it's not a huge distance.
They offered $800 yet no-one was willing to take it (and likely airfare back too). Depending on the plane, that's 150 people who absolutely must be there at a set time, can't be a few hours later? Which ironically in the end, would have got there at the same time anyway as this flight.
If you were a couple especially, you'd be far better off taking $1600 and getting a cab. If you can split it with the 2 other people which is highly likely, you'd be getting $800 each, and up for maybe $100 in taxi fare. $700 for a few hours of travel!
United needed to kick 4 people off… so that's 4 x lost airfares, $3200 in compensation, pissed off customers… why didn't they just taxi the staff? Seems a hell of a lot more logical.
Its not cash its a Airline voucher.
Obviously it wasn't enough for any volunteers.
They should of done what other companies do, keep upping the offer and changing it to cash.
I read there was one person who asked $1600 cash to get off, they laughed at him.
They have to pay cash if you want it, it's law in the US.
Only when its involuntary.
reddit is all over this.
When they make offers for volunteers they can offer what ever they want
Murica
The second one is probably why no one wanted to get off.
He can probably sue the airport, the airline aren't the ones who removed him, it was airport security/police.