collapse

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!


Author Topic: United Airlines  (Read 40796 times)

jficke13

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1358
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #25 on: April 11, 2017, 12:39:16 PM »
A billion in market cap flittered away today due to the poor pr response. This touched on a bigger consumer nerve that has been festering that will be industry-wide.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/11/investing/united-airlines-stock-passenger-flight-video/index.html

My bet is that it doesn't matter. The oligopoly and streamlining of airline hubs means that there aren't really substitutes for United on a great number of routes. I saw it put like this: "Want to go from Fargo to Denver in a hurry? Congratulations, you're a United customer."

Once the internet rage machine starts chasing a new laser pointer, the end result of this outrage will be: "I will never fly United again, at least until their itinerary is cheaper or the most convenient option available to me."

GooooMarquette

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9489
  • We got this.
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #26 on: April 11, 2017, 12:52:28 PM »
My bet is that it doesn't matter. The oligopoly and streamlining of airline hubs means that there aren't really substitutes for United on a great number of routes. I saw it put like this: "Want to go from Fargo to Denver in a hurry? Congratulations, you're a United customer."

Once the internet rage machine starts chasing a new laser pointer, the end result of this outrage will be: "I will never fly United again, at least until their itinerary is cheaper or the most convenient option available to me."

Regrettably true.  My choice of a primary airline was based on my location so that I could get places with a minimum of stops, not the quality of the flying experience.  Fortunately, that means I haven't had to fly United in over 20 years.

Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #27 on: April 11, 2017, 01:35:42 PM »
Yes, they can. Maybe the felon's response contributed to what we've seen on video.

Munoz is correct that he was "belligerent." But what he did not say is United made him belligerent.  They set him off by telling him to get off.

Then United "mislead" the aviation cop.  They told him they had a "belligerent" passenger and his action were appropriate for that circumstance.  What United did not tell him, or made clear to him, was United was the cause of his belligerence.  United set off the passenger and called to cop because he was set off.

Also the flight was not overbooked.  It was full and done until United called the gate AFTER they started boarding and then told the gate to "make room" for four employees.

At every turn United f'ed this up.  Munoz defending it means on the road to being the former CEO of United.

jesmu84

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6029
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #28 on: April 11, 2017, 01:36:54 PM »
Let me second this.  Flying is a terrible and miserable experience.  It is for the employees and the customers.  We tolerate the airport and the flight because it is more important to be somewhere than to complain about the awful service they provide.

So yes, it has touched a nerve, a big one.  the country wants "payback" for being treated badly by all airlines and will not stop until Munoz loses his job and their is wholesale changes in the industry.

His terrible PR response is what ruined his career, and many others at United.

Here what he should have said ...

"Like you, I woke up shocked and horrified by what happened on our flight to Louisville.  This is unacceptable!  Today I'm personally meeting with the agents, supervisors and aviation police out how this happened with the goal to make sure it never happens again."

Nope. As with most examples of "outrage", the public will forget about this in a week.

Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #29 on: April 11, 2017, 01:44:19 PM »
http://nypost.com/2017/04/11/doctor-dragged-off-flight-convicted-of-trading-drugs-for-sex/

Dao’s player profile on the World Series of Poker website lists his total earnings as $234,664 since he joined the poker circuit in 2006.

GB Warrior

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2265
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #30 on: April 11, 2017, 01:53:04 PM »
My bet is that it doesn't matter. The oligopoly and streamlining of airline hubs means that there aren't really substitutes for United on a great number of routes. I saw it put like this: "Want to go from Fargo to Denver in a hurry? Congratulations, you're a United customer."

Once the internet rage machine starts chasing a new laser pointer, the end result of this outrage will be: "I will never fly United again, at least until their itinerary is cheaper or the most convenient option available to me."

Here's the article you're referring to (religious deadspinner): http://fusion.net/airlines-can-treat-you-like-garbage-because-they-are-an-1794192270

Dr. Blackheart

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 13003
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #31 on: April 11, 2017, 01:59:21 PM »

I understand that.  But you do realize that legally the airline had a right to do what it did.  That's part of the deal when it comes to air travel.

That being said, I don't have a problem with the practice of overselling.  They should just have to up the offer until someone bites on it.  Not forcibly remove someone.

Quote
There’s another wrinkle. Rule 25 deals almost entirely with passengers denied boarding—in other words, people who never get on a plane. But in the Chicago incident, the passenger had already boarded when United employees told him he had to get off. Again, unless United has an unpublished policy dealing with this scenario, it’s not addressed in the contract of carriage. So even if United followed its own procedures, it would have violated government rule

Apparently, United will also be paying the government...

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/uniteds-real-mistake-173844672.html


Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #32 on: April 11, 2017, 02:05:32 PM »
Apparently, United will also be paying the government...

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/uniteds-real-mistake-173844672.html

From this link (which I noted above) Bold is my emphasis.  Again United F'ed this up.

The whole incident seems to have arisen from an unusual situation unanticipated by the airline. United says the flight was already fully boarded when four crew members approached the gate, saying they needed to board the plane to get to Louisville, where the flight was headed, or else a subsequent United departure out of Louisville would have to be canceled. So United made the probably rational decision that it was cheaper to bump four passengers and pay them for their troubles, than to leave the crew members in Chicago and cancel a Louisville departure.

This is where the whole thing went wrong. Three passengers chosen by United—how, remains unclear—apparently accepted the airline’s offer and got off the plane. But the fourth passenger United selected didn’t agree to get off, which led to the forced ejection captured on video and now seen by hundreds of millions worldwide.

United says it offered “up to $1,000” to coax the four passengers off the plane peacefully. Obviously it didn’t offer enough. Fliers everywhere wonder why United didn’t just keep raising its offer until somebody raised their hand. United hasn’t said why, but it may have had something to do with the flight running late and crew members feeling rushed. Still, summoning security in a situation that could have been defused peacefully for a few extra bucks, will surely go down as one of the most obtuse corporate decisions in years.

Bad publicity following the incident has pushed the company’s stock price down a couple percentage points and shaved more than $500 million off the carrier’s market value. Lawsuits seem certain, as well. The whole thing might blow over, if Munoz, who initially called the bumped passenger “disruptive and belligerent,” can muster a heartfelt apology and do something to act like he cares about customers. The lesson for now, however, is don’t ever do something this stupid in your own business.

dgies9156

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4022
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #33 on: April 11, 2017, 03:16:48 PM »
My bet is that it doesn't matter. The oligopoly and streamlining of airline hubs means that there aren't really substitutes for United on a great number of routes.

Been to Chicago lately?

The B, C and D Concourses are United.

The G, H and K Concourses are American.

These are hubs. Both American and United serve SDF.

Midway Airport is for all practical is a hub for Southwest. It too serves SDF.

Full disclosure: I'm an ultra high mileage United frequent flier. Still, the gate agent handled the situation poorly, no one can argue that. The crew that bumped the passengers showed up at the last minute and they had a conundrum. They should have been true free marketers, but airline cash flows being sacred, that probably was not going to happen.

A similar problem happened to me once in Denver. Our connecting flight was late, but within 20 minutes of departure. The door was still open and the jetway on the plane when I arrived. I gave them my boarding pass and access to the plane was denied because United had boarded someone else in my seat for the business trip I was taking to Spokane, WA (GEG). I was a first class passenger. They gave me some of the same bull*hit they gave about yesterday's O'Hare incident.

United's plan was to leave me sitting around DIA from 9:00 a.m., until 7:10 p.m., when they had their next departure to GEG. I usually do not have a particularly violent temper, but I did that day, especially since it was United's fault I was not there a half hour before the plane departed. They mis-loaded the cargo on the plane carrying the Chicago departure!

My temper and my high mileage paid off as United put me on a flight to Portland, OR and then on an Alaska Air flight to GEG. I was three hours late and an hour late for my meeting. But, there were eight other passengers connecting in Denver on my Chicago-Denver flight for GEG and were left for the day. Many had plans that evening ruined because of United. Plans that included family gatherings related to Gonzaga University's commencement.

dgies9156

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4022
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #34 on: April 11, 2017, 03:19:58 PM »
Munoz defending it means on the road to being the former CEO of United.

Munoz being the "former" CEO of United.

Commander Jeff (Smisek) he is not.

He'd have to bribe a Port Authority executive before that happened.

Jockey

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
  • “We want to get rid of the ballots"
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #35 on: April 11, 2017, 03:21:54 PM »
It's 4 hours to drive to Louisville, but the United thugs thought it was wiser to beat a passenger into submission?

warriorchick

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8066
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #36 on: April 11, 2017, 03:28:50 PM »
It's 4 hours to drive to Louisville, but the United thugs thought it was wiser to beat a passenger into submission?

More like six, but I am sure no one thought outside the box on this one.
Have some patience, FFS.

MUBurrow

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1392
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #37 on: April 11, 2017, 03:30:47 PM »
Apparently, United will also be paying the government...

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/uniteds-real-mistake-173844672.html

This article touches on, but doesn't directly address what I think is the biggest issue at play here - the jurisdiction and purpose of the Chicago Aviation Police. They are under the jurisdiction of the Chicago Department of Aviation, which I presume is a publicly funded department? If so, their use of force to uphold a contract for services between an individual and an airline strikes me as extremely problematic.  The law goes to tremendous lengths to ensure legal process before agents of any public entity can be called upon to enforce a private contract, and here we have a guy getting dragged out of an airplane and injury being caused to his person upon what could have been no more than an hour of notice to the officers. 

Jockey

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
  • “We want to get rid of the ballots"
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #38 on: April 11, 2017, 04:04:24 PM »
More like six, but I am sure no one thought outside the box on this one.

From Chicago?

Only with a women driver ;D

RJax55

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #39 on: April 11, 2017, 04:09:22 PM »
This article touches on, but doesn't directly address what I think is the biggest issue at play here - the jurisdiction and purpose of the Chicago Aviation Police. They are under the jurisdiction of the Chicago Department of Aviation, which I presume is a publicly funded department? If so, their use of force to uphold a contract for services between an individual and an airline strikes me as extremely problematic.  The law goes to tremendous lengths to ensure legal process before agents of any public entity can be called upon to enforce a private contract, and here we have a guy getting dragged out of an airplane and injury being caused to his person upon what could have been no more than an hour of notice to the officers.

I agree, but if United reports they have a "belligerent passenger" then Airport Police must respond. By not following crew instructions, the passenger could be ruled as "belligerent". However, I find this very problematic, made worse by the fact that it looks like United did not follow Department of Transportation guidelines in the first place.

The issue of overselling and booting paying customers needs to be addressed wholesale within the industry. Again, IMO United deserves any negative fallout they receive. 
« Last Edit: April 11, 2017, 04:12:56 PM by RJax55 »

Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #40 on: April 11, 2017, 04:16:11 PM »
This article touches on, but doesn't directly address what I think is the biggest issue at play here - the jurisdiction and purpose of the Chicago Aviation Police. They are under the jurisdiction of the Chicago Department of Aviation, which I presume is a publicly funded department? If so, their use of force to uphold a contract for services between an individual and an airline strikes me as extremely problematic.  The law goes to tremendous lengths to ensure legal process before agents of any public entity can be called upon to enforce a private contract, and here we have a guy getting dragged out of an airplane and injury being caused to his person upon what could have been no more than an hour of notice to the officers.

That is why I said United most likely mislead the Aviation police.  I say this because if the Aviation cop was told:

We need to throw this passenger off the plane to make room for a crew member needed in Louisville to prevent us from cancelling a flight and costing is money.  So please drag him off to help protect our bottom line.  Oh, you can use the excuse that he is belligerent as he is only because we told him to get off the plane and that upset him.  He was fine before that.

I'm guessing had the aviation cop understood this to be the real situation, he might have reconsidered his use of force, or at least his guidelines would have.

JWags85

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2978
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #41 on: April 11, 2017, 04:17:22 PM »
It's 4 hours to drive to Louisville, but the United thugs thought it was wiser to beat a passenger into submission?

It was airport police, not United employees.  And can we please stop with the "thug"nonsense in this case.

Like dgies, I'm a high mileage United flier and I'm more than willing to admit they f'd up here.  Both from a procedural and a PR standpoint.  However, the piety of social media and commentors of "this would never happen on Delta/American/etc" is absurd.  If this is enough to move your business completely to another airline, you must not fly much.  Air travel has its warts, you deal with it and hope the numbers are in your favor when it comes to abnormal events like the travel crew in this case.

I also find it rich that all these passengers were shocked, horrified, clutching their pearls...but nobody would give up their seat for this doctor to get home to whatever medical duties he was claiming.  "I CANT BELIEVE THEY FORCED HIM OFF THE PLANE, HES A DOCTOR!...oh no, I have to get back home, I couldn't be bothered to offer my seat, but I made sure I posted video".  There was a flight to Louisville something like 2 hours later with plenty of empty seats.

mu03eng

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5049
    • Scrambled Eggs Podcast
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #42 on: April 11, 2017, 04:18:26 PM »
More like six, but I am sure no one thought outside the box on this one.

Problem is it would have violated crew rest for the group bound to Louisville.....they couldn't have flown the next morning if they drove to Louisville. Additionally, my understanding was the crew manning the ORD to SDF was also bumping up against their mandatory crew rest timeline so they felt the pressure to resolve quickly.

Bottom line, somebody made decisions based entirely on what would make life ideal for the business as opposed to the customer (which is United's go to move) and it completely backfired. They could have shifted crews in SDF or called in a stand-by crew to cover the flight that the deadheading crew would have missed so they didn't HAVE to get them there, certainly not to the urgency that they had to kick people off a flight already boarded.

Quite frankly, I've seen it done by the gate agent, no reason it couldn't be done on the flight very quickly....hold an auction, first 4 people that jump at the offer as it escalates win.

Lots of stupid going on in this issue.....but we'll have forgotten about it two weeks from now.
"A Plan? Oh man, I hate plans. That means were gonna have to do stuff. Can't we just have a strategy......or a mission statement."

mu03eng

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5049
    • Scrambled Eggs Podcast
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #43 on: April 11, 2017, 04:19:39 PM »
There was a flight to Louisville something like 2 hours later with plenty of empty seats.

Wait, is this true? All the reports I've seen said there wasn't a flight until the next day.
"A Plan? Oh man, I hate plans. That means were gonna have to do stuff. Can't we just have a strategy......or a mission statement."

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #44 on: April 11, 2017, 04:21:32 PM »
It was airport police, not United employees.  And can we please stop with the "thug"nonsense in this case.

Like dgies, I'm a high mileage United flier and I'm more than willing to admit they f'd up here.  Both from a procedural and a PR standpoint.  However, the piety of social media and commentors of "this would never happen on Delta/American/etc" is absurd.  If this is enough to move your business completely to another airline, you must not fly much.  Air travel has its warts, you deal with it and hope the numbers are in your favor when it comes to abnormal events like the travel crew in this case.

I also find it rich that all these passengers were shocked, horrified, clutching their pearls...but nobody would give up their seat for this doctor to get home to whatever medical duties he was claiming.  "I CANT BELIEVE THEY FORCED HIM OFF THE PLANE, HES A DOCTOR!...oh no, I have to get back home, I couldn't be bothered to offer my seat, but I made sure I posted video".  There was a flight to Louisville something like 2 hours later with plenty of empty seats.


And to be fair, I have seen interviews of some of the passengers who said that the passenger should have left on his own.  Again, this is part of the deal when it comes to air travel.

Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #45 on: April 11, 2017, 04:26:12 PM »
I agree, but if United reports they have a "belligerent passenger" then Airport Police must respond. By not following crew instructions, the passenger could be ruled as "belligerent". However, I find this very problematic, made worse by the fact that it looks like United did not follow Department of Transportation guidelines in the first place.

The issue of overselling and booting paying customers needs to be addressed wholesale within the industry. Again, IMO United deserves any negative fallout they receive.

The plane was not overbooked.  It was full and loaded and ready to go, then the four crew members arrived at the gate and informed gate personnel that needed to make four seats available for them.  In other words, throw four people off the plane.

So the issue is not overbooking (at least in this case) but rather how far and airline can go in prioritizing employees (and profits) over the agreement with a customer to a seat on that flight.  It is not really a stretch to say the flight was ready to go and they opened the door and said "before we can leave four of you paying passengers have to get off so make room for four employees."

This was purely an economic decision by United, they were worried about the money it would cost them in cancelling the flight the next morning out of Louisville.  As a paying customer of United, that is not my problem, and should not be made my problem.

At every turn United is wrong here.  Monoz saying they acted properly and calling the passenger belligerent is simply terrible, again because United made him that way! As Buzz would say, character revealed.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2017, 04:31:58 PM by 1.21 Jigawatts »

dgies9156

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4022
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #46 on: April 11, 2017, 04:29:07 PM »
Problem is it would have violated crew rest for the group bound to Louisville.....they couldn't have flown the next morning if they drove to Louisville. Additionally, my understanding was the crew manning the ORD to SDF was also bumping up against their mandatory crew rest timeline so they felt the pressure to resolve quickly.

Lots of stupid going on in this issue.....but we'll have forgotten about it two weeks from now.

BINGO!!!!!! On all accounts!

Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #47 on: April 11, 2017, 04:33:50 PM »

And to be fair, I have seen interviews of some of the passengers who said that the passenger should have left on his own.  Again, this is part of the deal when it comes to air travel.

Because he was holding up the flight and making them late.  It was most convenient for them that he cooperate and get off, not them!
« Last Edit: April 11, 2017, 04:36:08 PM by 1.21 Jigawatts »

RJax55

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #48 on: April 11, 2017, 04:37:21 PM »
The plane was not overbooked

Correct, I should have stated oversold, overbooked or adding crew to make a flight over-capacity.

I think 03 summed it up best... "Bottom line, somebody made decisions based entirely on what would make life ideal for the business as opposed to the customer (which is United's go to move) and it completely backfired."

And, as JWag points out other airlines do it as well. Could have easily happened with another carrier.

What this incident illustrates is the glaring need for additional consumer protection. And, it becomes an instant case of what not to do in a PR communications crisis.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2017, 04:39:11 PM by RJax55 »

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: United Airlines
« Reply #49 on: April 11, 2017, 04:39:23 PM »
Because he was holding up the flight and making them late.  It was most convenient for them that he cooperate and get off, not them!


Correct.  I would have gotten off if my name was called.  I would have been pissed had someone else not gotten off when their name was called.

 

feedback