Don't fly United

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really don't care about the doctor's past. They didn't know that when they took him off the plane. Did they?

+1,000,000 This smear campaign is against him is shameful! It definitely has nothing to do with the incident. The recent news actually said that they volunteered to be off at first but when they found out that they won't be home until the following day, he backed out and that's when he said he has patients to see the following day. The witnesses said he was calm when he talked to the flight attendant about the situation, the ruckus only started when they yanked him out( which would be understandable). It was actually the attendant who sounded annoyed( according to passengers). Point is... Deliberately yanking out a boarded passenger just because he did not agree top be volunteered by United is NOT the only option to be someone off the plane. Bottom line-United acted like thugs because they thought they can do so, just because they know that on the fine print of the passenger agreement, it says that you can be bumped. Funny thing is, the CEO's attitude just confirmed that this is their Company culture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's your point, 5:55? This thread is about what United Airlines did to one of their passengers.

I will never, ever trust United Airlines again with my safety.

There's more to the story...that's the point. He also has a history of mental illness and acting out, which explains his noncompliance and acting out.

Let's be real: would you want to fly with a noncompliant belligerent crazy person? Of course not.

Now the entire world knows that guy exchanged drugs for gay sex. You would think he would have known that it was in his best interest to stay under the radar. That just shows you how crazy he is.

There isn't more to the story. It was all caught on video PP. If he was so "belligerent and crazy" then why would they accept him as a paying customer on a plane in the first place?

Exactly. They made an offer of an $800 travel voucher which no one wanted. Instead of improving their offer they dragged a man off the plane. Their corporate culture is so broken that they viewed that as a viable alternative to instead offering a better deal to get volunteers. It's a disgusting abuse of a private citizen by a corporation. It's not okay, and United's smear campaign against the man won't change that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really don't care about the doctor's past. They didn't know that when they took him off the plane. Did they?

Exactly. United Airlines is a big BAD bully. They targeted an Asian man. This will HURT them and every UAL stockholder.

Our politicians are beginning to speak up about this egregious abuse of consumers. Good. The more, the better! Now we must hold them accountable to vote in OUR favor, instead of the airline lobbyists' favor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Exactly. They made an offer of an $800 travel voucher which no one wanted. Instead of improving their offer they dragged a man off the plane. Their corporate culture is so broken that they viewed that as a viable alternative to instead offering a better deal to get volunteers. It's a disgusting abuse of a private citizen by a corporation. It's not okay, and United's smear campaign against the man won't change that.

Here's why I think they only offered up to $800. That's when asking for volunteers, and they can offer as much as they want.

If they don't get any volunteers (indeed they didn't), then they move to involuntary denied boarding. In that case, the federal regulations come into play and the maximum compensation is 4x the ticket value up to $1350, but it's in cash. Well on a flight like that, the cheapest tickets were probably around $150 (given the distance and my experience with similar routes on United), so they knew if they went involuntary, they'd owe $600 in cash, so no use in offering more than $800 in vouchers for _voluntary_.

Not a great policy, and I'm not justifying it, but I'm guessing this was the reason behind it. Also from what I've read from gate agents, the computer not only picks who gets deboarded (based largely on who paid the least for their ticket, due to the formula above), but also places a limit on how much they can offer for the _voluntary_ situation, so I think the computer capped it at $800 because of how much they'd have to pay out if then went to involuntary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's your point, 5:55? This thread is about what United Airlines did to one of their passengers.

I will never, ever trust United Airlines again with my safety.

There's more to the story...that's the point. He also has a history of mental illness and acting out, which explains his noncompliance and acting out.

Let's be real: would you want to fly with a noncompliant belligerent crazy person? Of course not.

Now the entire world knows that guy exchanged drugs for gay sex. You would think he would have known that it was in his best interest to stay under the radar. That just shows you how crazy he is.

There isn't more to the story. It was all caught on video PP. If he was so "belligerent and crazy" then why would they accept him as a paying customer on a plane in the first place?

It sounds like maybe they shouldn't have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't care about the doctor's past. They didn't know that when they took him off the plane. Did they?

Exactly. United Airlines is a big BAD bully. They targeted an Asian man. This will HURT them and every UAL stockholder.

Bullies, probably, but they didn't target Asians. They have no incentive to do so, and who gets selected is chosen by the computer, who knows nothing about the traveler's race.

UAL's stockholders are doing fine so far. Stock was down 1.1% yesterday, which is brings it down to where it was about 3 weeks ago. Hardly a 20% plunge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If he was so "belligerent and crazy" then why would they accept him as a paying customer on a plane in the first place?

It wasn't an option to list that when he did online check-in.

[Anonymous]

https://twitter.com/i/moments/851960100654784517?lang=en

Too Many PR problems this week

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's your point, 5:55? This thread is about what United Airlines did to one of their passengers.

I will never, ever trust United Airlines again with my safety.

There's more to the story...that's the point. He also has a history of mental illness and acting out, which explains his noncompliance and acting out.

Let's be real: would you want to fly with a noncompliant belligerent crazy person? Of course not.

Now the entire world knows that guy exchanged drugs for gay sex. You would think he would have known that it was in his best interest to stay under the radar. That just shows you how crazy he is.

Oh please. The smear campaign is disgusting. United should be ashamed of themselves, and so should the Post.

Yup. Give me a break. Everyone has fucked up at some point in their lives. That doesn't justify the assault.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's your point, 5:55? This thread is about what United Airlines did to one of their passengers.

I will never, ever trust United Airlines again with my safety.

There's more to the story...that's the point. He also has a history of mental illness and acting out, which explains his noncompliance and acting out.

Let's be real: would you want to fly with a noncompliant belligerent crazy person? Of course not.

Now the entire world knows that guy exchanged drugs for gay sex. You would think he would have known that it was in his best interest to stay under the radar. That just shows you how crazy he is.

Oh please. The smear campaign is disgusting. United should be ashamed of themselves, and so should the Post.

Yup. Give me a break. Everyone has fucked up at some point in their lives. That doesn't justify the assault.

Exactly. United should be ashamed of themselves, but they aren't.

[Anonymous]

Regarding the subject of targeting certain passengers/demographic groups, I've long had a theory that "flying while female" means getting treated differently. I was once booked to fly back to my home country first class (someone else was paying), and the airline called the day before wanting to downgrade me. I said "no" and they tried to rebook me for another day. I said "no" as I was quite keen to get back for my wedding. This kind of rearranging has never happened to my husband.

Other times they have tried to move me around the plane, separate me from my husband and kids (I have a different surname), or have transferred me to a non-direct flight going from BWI instead a direct one from IAD. Once, a foreign airline tried to take away my prebooked bulkhead seat (with a bassinet for my baby) to give it to the wife & baby of someone traveling in business class. It turned out to be a work colleague and family who had tried to bump me.

At airports, they often seem to target me for extra groping to meet their daily quota, I think because they think as a middle aged woman, that I will be "nice".

My husband, who travels for business a lot, confirmed my theory saying that he has observed airlines messing with his female colleagues' flight/seating arrangements, more so than with the men's.

[Anonymous]

United Airlines knew the guy was a ethnic MINORITY by his last name. Duh.

[Anonymous]

Can't wait to see his press release and news about litigation. He should definitely sue, along with the other passengers that got inconvenienced in this flight, it has been an emotionally draining ordeal for a lot of people!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait to see his press release and news about litigation. He should definitely sue, along with the other passengers that got inconvenienced in this flight, it has been an emotionally draining ordeal for a lot of people!

I probably would have been traumatized just witnessing that kind of ordeal, probably to the point of never being able to get on another plane. I know, crazy me, but very likely. I'm what they call "highly impressionable". It'll be a good while before I get on another flight, just having seen the video. And I'm never taking United.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Regarding the subject of targeting certain passengers/demographic groups, I've long had a theory that "flying while female" means getting treated differently. I was once booked to fly back to my home country first class (someone else was paying), and the airline called the day before wanting to downgrade me. I said "no" and they tried to rebook me for another day. I said "no" as I was quite keen to get back for my wedding. This kind of rearranging has never happened to my husband.

Other times they have tried to move me around the plane, separate me from my husband and kids (I have a different surname), or have transferred me to a non-direct flight going from BWI instead a direct one from IAD. Once, a foreign airline tried to take away my prebooked bulkhead seat (with a bassinet for my baby) to give it to the wife & baby of someone traveling in business class. It turned out to be a work colleague and family who had tried to bump me.

At airports, they often seem to target me for extra groping to meet their daily quota, I think because they think as a middle aged woman, that I will be "nice".

My husband, who travels for business a lot, confirmed my theory saying that he has observed airlines messing with his female colleagues' flight/seating arrangements, more so than with the men's.

This is a great topic for a spin off. Our family flies international business class and I continue to be shocked at how well the flight attendants treat my husband and how I'm virtually ignored beyond the bare minimum of service (but I won't complain here where my "mistreatment" by United pales in comparison).