United Airlines Passenger Dragged from Plane

[Maggie Mae]

I wish that I could believe that this video and United's public image would mean a damn thing. But it won't. People will still fly on whatever is cheapest and gamble that it won't happen to them.

I'm happy with Alaska, but I'm always afraid of these kind of things. Other airlines see that they can get away with offering less and terrible service (southwest, spirit, jet blue, united) and then the nice airlines decide they also up their fees and offer less. It's bad enough that Alaska took over Virgin. What next? 

[Georgiana]

There seems to be some misconception with how airports are secured.  Those aren't mall cops.  Those are the Chicago Aviation Police.  They are a specialized unit of the Chicago Police Department.  

I work with a lot of ports and trade hubs, including airports.  Security is no joke there, and the agents who provide security are FULLY municipal, state or federal agents with as much (generally more) power as any officer on the street.  They don't fuck around, and with good reason.

You do not have a right to be on a private plane.  In fact, you don't even have a right to air travel at all.  If someone (the owner of that plane) tells you to disembark, you do.  Similarly, if I tell you to get out of my house, you listen.  Or if the owner of a restaurant tells you to leave.  Or any number of things.  The instant you do NOT comply, you are trespassing, and the police may come to remove you.  If you refuse to cooperate with the police, you could face additional charges.

I don't agree with what happened.  I don't agree with how the CAP handled this, especially as I believe the force was unnecessary.  HOWEVER, once asked to exit the plane, the passenger should have done so.  They did NOT have any right to forcibly remain on the plane once asked to leave.  

[Dandruff]

16 minutes ago, Maggie Mae said:

I wish that I could believe that this video and United's public image would mean a damn thing. But it won't. People will still fly on whatever is cheapest and gamble that it won't happen to them.

I think if people were fed up with United to begin with, they'll be much less likely to forget this video or be willing to choose United to save a few dollars.  If people didn't care one way or the other to begin with, then I imagine this situation will fade from memory pretty quickly.

I'm in the first group.  My experiences with United were already, and repeatedly, bad enough to put them at the bottom of my list.  Given that association, I don't expect to be forgetting the video or United's initial response to it.

I hope they don't find themselves with another overbooking situation for a very long time.

[zygote373]

18 minutes ago, Georgiana said:

 HOWEVER, once asked to exit the plane, the passenger should have done so.  They did NOT have any right to forcibly remain on the plane once asked to leave.

Well, sure, and if it were me I probably would have gotten off the plane and saved my fury for the gate agent, who I would expect to help me with a United-funded rental car so I could drive down in time to see my patients. 

Whether or not the airline was technically in the right to refuse service to this passenger, the optics are terrible. This man wasn't asked to leave for being belligerent or drunk. He was asked to leave because United messed up their staffing. And to top it all off, he is a doctor with patients to see in the morning, and the next flight out wasn't until the next afternoon.

As someone who travels pretty frequently, it is frustrating how airlines treat their passengers as a cash commodity instead of human beings with lives. People pick the flights they buy for a reason, and it is often more than a minor inconvenience to be held back a day. United handled this so poorly.

[Mercer]

I certainly would have been able to see United's side of the story if this had been a true emergency - but it wasn't, it was their own poor planning, which they then wanted to fix at the least possible inconvenience to themselves regardless of the inconvenience to the customer. They have the legal right to remove a passenger, but there's a difference between things you have a legal right to do and things that are actually a good idea. This idea was a piss-poor one, to be blunt. My guess is that the employees got frustrated and dug in rather than letting the passenger "win" by finding a better compromise, but the negativity generated here outweighs any possible gain. In the end, no one won. 

[nausicaa]

38 minutes ago, Georgiana said:

You do not have a right to be on a private plane.  In fact, you don't even have a right to air travel at all.  If someone (the owner of that plane) tells you to disembark, you do.  Similarly, if I tell you to get out of my house, you listen.  Or if the owner of a restaurant tells you to leave.  Or any number of things.  The instant you do NOT comply, you are trespassing, and the police may come to remove you.  If you refuse to cooperate with the police, you could face additional charges.

I don't agree with what happened.  I don't agree with how the CAP handled this, especially as I believe the force was unnecessary.  HOWEVER, once asked to exit the plane, the passenger should have done so.  They did NOT have any right to forcibly remain on the plane once asked to leave.  

I guess my issue with this argument is that he had an implicit contract with United--he paid a certain amount of money and in return it was understood the airline would fly him on its private plane from one destination to another. Aren't all financial transactions implicit agreements?

Following your analogy, if we had an agreement that I would pay you $800 to rent your house for the month of April, and I paid the amount and settled in, you wouldn't have the right to come into the bedroom on April 5th and drag me out because suddenly you decided you wanted to host a party for your friends there.

 

Also, peripheral question--I see a lot of talk about overbooking, but is that what this really was? My understanding was that four United employees needed to get somewhere the next day and United decided at the last minute to have them on that flight. Which makes this all even more ridiculous. The company could have had them fly the next day, take another less crowded flight, or hired a rental car. By trying to save a few thousand dollars, they just cost themselves millions.

[hoipolloi]

1 hour ago, Georgiana said:

Those aren't mall cops.  Those are the Chicago Aviation Police.  They are a specialized unit of the Chicago Police Department.  

All the more appalling, then, if they were actually professionals.

 

 

[Mercer]

This was an extremely dramatic incident, but airlines cut corners and expect passengers to just deal with the resulting inconvenience and financial loss all the time.

An example from my own travel: I was on a flight that was significantly delayed because the airline had neglected to file a flight plan. I was pretty surprised because this seems like a really basic and routine expectation for this type of service provider, but they're human and mistakes happen, so I wasn't too upset... until I went to rebook the connecting flight I had missed and was told that I was going to have to pay for a new ticket because it was coded in their computer as passenger error rather than carrier error that I had missed my connection. Technically we had gotten in before the connecting flight left... but only by a few minutes, and we had to clear customs and immigration and then get to a different terminal in a large airport and go through security again - it just wasn't physically possible. Of course I argued with the lady at the desk, but she stuck to her guns that the whole thing was my fault and then when she realized that she wasn't even sounding logical, she shifted tactics to saying that she had to go by what the computer said and the computer supposedly couldn't be changed.

I did eventually get rebooked, but only because I made clear I wasn't going to leave the desk until I had a seat on a different flight without paying any additional money. I'm an extremely patient person, but the more she was insisting it was my fault rather than theirs, even I was getting pretty sarcastic. (I remember saying at one point, "Oh, I didn't realize I was supposed to file the flight plan!" ) 

It was such a stupid ordeal that could have been solved in minutes by the employee saying, "Sorry about that, we'll get you booked on the next available flight!" But the airline was trying to save a few hundred bucks at my expense regardless of if it even made sense or the impression it left on me as a customer.

[Georgiana]

10 minutes ago, nausicaa said:

I guess my issue with this argument is that he had an implicit contract with United--he paid a certain amount of money and in return it was understood the airline would fly him on its private plane from one destination to another. Aren't all financial transactions implicit agreements?

Following your analogy, if we had an agreement that I would pay you $800 to rent your house for the month of April, and I paid the amount and settled in, you wouldn't have the right to come into the bedroom on April 5th and drag me out because suddenly you decided you wanted to host a party for your friends there.

 

Also, peripheral question--I see a lot of talk about overbooking, but is that what this really was? My understanding was that four United employees needed to get somewhere the next day and United decided at the last minute to have them on that flight. Which makes this all even more ridiculous. The company could have had them fly the next day, take another less crowded flight, or hired a rental car. By trying to save a few thousand dollars, they just cost themselves millions.

He DID have a contract, a contract that SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED for this situation!   When you book a ticket with an airline, you are required to agree to their COC (contract of carriage) which says that they have the right to remove you or re-book you for certain reasons.  I looked up United's specifically when this happened.  This situation is covered as a reason why they may bump or re-book you.    I don't agree with that, but that's what he agreed to when he bought the ticket.  Unfortunately, it is now questionable whether he is entitled to compensation should push comes to shove.  When he refused to remove the plane he violated the contract (whereas United did not), and so his ticket may have been voided.  

 Tenancy is a unique situation with unique legal protections not in place here, so I am going to switch examples and stick with airlines.  The most frequent time that airlines cite the COC to deny service is with drunk people.  When you buy a ticket for a plane, you agree to their terms which state that if you are disorderly, you will be removed from the plane and your ticket may be forfeit.   So it doesn't matter if a drunk or disorderly person has a ticket, they violated the terms of the ticket contract with their behavior.  

It's like me agreeing to give you a ride to the airport, but saying I had certain terms and conditions, such as not wanting to drive you late at night.  You agree.  If you try and cite that agreement when you want a ride at 2AM, I will say that this violates the terms of our agreement which states the ride will not be given under certain circumstances.

[hoipolloi]

26 minutes ago, nausicaa said:

Also, peripheral question--I see a lot of talk about overbooking, but is that what this really was?

Technically, no. This was about a last minute "accommodatIon" of a dead-head crew who needed 4 seats on that plane. 

ETA: the problem for UAL *may* be that they retroactively denied boarding AFTER boarding everyone, including the 4 pax who were "randomly" selected for bumping. The word "random" does not comport with UAL's own language regarding how they handle bumping.

The problem for the MD who was forcibly dragged off the plan is that, as @Georgiana points out, defying a FA's or flight crew members' direction (even request in some circumstances) is grounds for removal as well. Between 9-11 & the absolute power/monopoly of the big 4 US air carriers, consumers are basically SOL in these situations whether or not you cooperate.

[Jennifer Hart]

They already started digging up information on the passenger.

http://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2017/04/11/david-dao-passenger-removed-united-flight-doctor-troubled-past/100318320/

Dao, his wife and two other passengers were asked to leave the aircraft because the flight was full and four crew members needed their seats, according to witnesses who were on the flight. The airline had offered vouchers worth up to $800 for passengers to give up their seats, but no one took the offer. Four passengers, including Dao, were then selected to be bumped.

A Louisville resident on the flight, Audra Bridges, told the Courier-Journal that Dao said he was a doctor and needed to see patients the next morning. Bridges said passengers were "shocked and appalled" by the incident, and thousands of people on social media have expressed sympathy for Dao and outrage over the way the situation was handled.

Dao's wife, Dr. Teresa Dao, has a pulmonary practice in Elizabethtown. Office staff at her clinic said Tuesday that neither Dao nor his wife wished to speak with a reporter regarding the United incident.

Dao, who went to medical school in Vietnam in the 1970s before moving to the U.S., has worked as a pulmonologist in Elizabethtown but was arrested in 2003 and eventually convicted of drug-related offenses after an undercover investigation, according to documents filed with the Kentucky Board of Medical Licensure last June.

The documents allege that he was involved in fraudulent prescriptions for controlled substances and was sexually involved with a patient who used to work for his practice and assisted police in building a case against him.

Dao was convicted of multiple felony counts of obtaining drugs by fraud or deceit in November 2004 and was placed on five years of supervised probation in January 2005, according to the documents. He surrendered his medical license the next month.

The Kentucky Board of Medical Licensure permitted Dao to resume practicing medicine in 2015 under certain conditions.

[Georgiana]

11 minutes ago, hoipolloi said:

Technically, no. This was about a last minute "accommodatIon" of a dead-head crew who needed 4 seats on that plane. 

ETA: the problem for UAL *may* be that they retroactively denied boarding AFTER boarding everyone, including the 4 pax who were "randomly" selected for bumping. The word "random" does not comport with UAL's own language regarding how they handle bumping.

The problem for the MD who was forcibly dragged off the plan is that, as @Georgiana points out, defying a FA's or flight crew members' direction (even request in some circumstances) is grounds for removal as well. Between 9-11 & the absolute power/monopoly of the big 4 US air carriers, consumers are basically SOL in these situations whether or not you cooperate.

I agree.  Europe has much more stringent requirements regarding compensation of passengers for flights that do not go as planned.  I believe the US should hold airlines more accountable for their failures to deliver on their end of the ticket contract.  

[Mercer]

18 minutes ago, hoipolloi said:

All the more appalling, then, if they were actually professionals.

Yeah, this makes the whole story a lot more confusing to me.

Are the Chicago police not trained at all in de-escalation, conflict resolution, or solution-focused strategies?

[hoipolloi]

1 minute ago, Georgiana said:

Europe has much more stringent requirements regarding compensation of passengers for flights that do not go as planned.  I believe the US should hold airlines more accountable for their failures to deliver on their end of the ticket contract.

Yes. Just flew back from London-Heathrow (on UAL!!!), and there are prominently placed signs everywhere on what to do if your scheduled flight is delayed by more than 2 hours & how to seek redress.

[Georgiana]

4 minutes ago, Mercer said:

Yeah, this makes the whole story a lot more confusing to me.

Are the Chicago police not trained at all in de-escalation, conflict resolution, or solution-focused strategies?

They are, which again, makes the incident even worse.  Other police have commented that they are not sure WHY the passenger was removed in such a manner when a standard twist and cuff would have been more than enough to subdue him and safely remove him from the plane.    The officer in question is under investigation for what happened.  

[Maggie Mae]

I think the difference between US and European airlines is that the US deregulated airlines in the late 70s. The government doesn't have control over anything other than safety (FAA.) Everything else is "free market" (with the same big business monopoly regulations as other businesses. I guess when Alaska and Virgin merged, Alaska had to give up the partnership with American Airlines, but now they have hubs in more cities in the US.) 

Like everything, there are pros and a whole lot of cons to the deregulation. 

[nausicaa]

33 minutes ago, Georgiana said:

He DID have a contract, a contract that SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED for this situation!   When you book a ticket with an airline, you are required to agree to their COC (contract of carriage) which says that they have the right to remove you or re-book you for certain reasons.  I looked up United's specifically when this happened.  This situation is covered as a reason why they may bump or re-book you.    I don't agree with that, but that's what he agreed to when he bought the ticket.  Unfortunately, it is now questionable whether he is entitled to compensation should push comes to shove.  When he refused to remove the plane he violated the contract (whereas United did not), and so his ticket may have been voided.  

If the situation is covered, do you think that the violation of this contract could affect a lawsuit? (Which, I'm assuming is inevitable here, and I'm also assuming there will be two separate lawsuits, against United as well as the Chicago PD.)

And yes, if those were real police officers, I don't know why they didn't just cuff him and escort him off. It would have still been excessive imo, and terrible optics, but it would have been a hell of a lot better than this nightmare for United's publicity department.

For me, all of this is just a demonstration of how weirdly militarized airports have become. I heard an FAA agent tell someone in line once "You don't have constitutional rights here." That is absolute bullshit.

23 minutes ago, Mercer said:

Are the Chicago police not trained at all in de-escalation, conflict resolution, or solution-focused strategies?

Well, if they are anything like the majority of police departments in the U.S. I'm gonna go with...  

[ShepherdontheRock]

Funny story- I was flying to Tokyo this past weekend on Delta, and arrived there a day late because Delta took 6 hours to find a crew and pilots for our first plane. We missed our connection, and we're quite annoyed with Delta, as was everyone stranded by last week's computer failures. Then I heard about this and my first thought was "Delta's PR people must be relieved"

Some thoughts:

- Dr. Dao probably legally isn't in the right, but I would think that it might be prudent for UA to settle with him in light of all this negative publicity that has caused their stock to drop

-I get that gate agents are stuck between a rock and a hard place but there had to be a better way to do this. You offer enough and someone will get up. From what I understand getting the police involved only delayed things even more. 

-Also the whole police response about him "falling" against the armrest, and the CEO response...we have a video and they're still trying to spin a story. 

-I actually don't know why Dr. Dao's profession or professional history is relevant. Especially if he was in fact, "randomly selected."

-While i would have probably just left the plane and then given the gate agent a piece of my mind, things talking about Dr. Dao being "belligerent" strikes me as victim blame for some reason

But yeah. After the week they've had, I bet Delta PR heard about this incident and thanked their preferred dieties profusely. I mean Delta may not have a good system about not delaying/canceling flights but at least they don't get cops to do their dirty work. And that's another thing? Shouldnt the cops tell them forced deplaning is a security risk? 

Just my tired, jet lagged thoughts.

 

[zygote373]

5 minutes ago, ShepherdontheRock said:

We missed our connection, and we're quite annoyed with Delta, as was everyone stranded by last week's computer failures. Then I heard about this and my first thought was "Delta's PR people must be relieved"

Yeah, my parents have actually been stuck on vacation in Florida an extra five days because Delta canceled so many flights due to storms in Atlanta last week. Delta has refused to give them anything for the five nights (!!) of extra hotel charges because the delay was "weather related". They are pretty annoyed, and they're going to see what can be done by calling when they get home. 

Then again, it hasn't exactly been a hardship for them to sit in the sun for five extra days and they can manage the extra hotel cost. Then this happened and put it into extra perspective. (They're at the airport for the third time since Thursday and not on their plane yet, so that could still change....)

[front hugs > duggs]

39 minutes ago, hoipolloi said:

Yes. Just flew back from London-Heathrow (on UAL!!!), and there are prominently placed signs everywhere on what to do if your scheduled flight is delayed by more than 2 hours & how to seek redress.

This is crazy to me! I was on an American Airlines flight that was delayed for 5 hours due to a bird strike. We ended up needing a new plane, which I can't complain about because I'd much rather be safe if they thought there was issue with the original plane. My problem was that they didn't make any announcements about it, other than two original announcements in the first half hour of delay (which was only announce when boarding was meant to begin). So we went 4.5 hours with not a single announcement or update, and I thought that was pretty unacceptable. I wrote to them telling them that, also arguing that between 5 extra hours in the airport, plus a five hour flight with no food served, that's 10 hours with American Airlines not providing anything. I know some airlines at least give food vouchers for the airport.

I complained when I got home and got a $50 AA credit 

I'm learning so much in this thread about our rights as passengers in this situation. Thank you everyone for sharing!

[47of74]

This is why I'd rather drive then fly.  Hell if I could I would drive or take a train to Europe.   

Last week when I was in the Twin Cities for school I told my classmates that even if where I lived had a direct flight I'd rather drive, regardless of airline.  I only live 5.5 hours away.  I figure by the time everything is figured in then you don't save any time, nor money if you're like me and rent a car for the week.  I'd rather have my own vehicle so I don't have to worry about weight restrictions or seats that even stick figures would find too small.  

I closed my United mileage account today.  There was nothing in there anyway.  The one time I did fly with them they never credited my account with the mileage and I gave up trying to get them to put the mileage in after a while.

[fraurosena]

Ah, how sweet the taste of retribution is:

All this for something they could have handled much, much cheaper and quite effectively by using Uber to send their four employees to their destination. Their short-sightedness and utter disregard for their customers has come to bite them in the ass. Bigly.

[hoipolloi]

3 hours ago, front hugs > duggs said:

I'm learning so much in this thread about our rights as passengers in this situation. Thank you everyone for sharing!

This seems to be an accurate & useful summary of passenger rights.

ETA: an overview of what rights an air passenger may have in the EU. The signage I saw at Heathrow referred to EU 261 among other things.

[hoipolloi]

UAL's CEO has posted an updated apology:

 

[ViolaSebastian]

Yeah, a day late and a dollar short there, buddy.