They're trying to not piss people off by bumping someone off prematurely. They have to assign passengers that are physically there a seat at some point before boarding starts so they'll assign the seats with the hope that they'll get a last minute cancellation or a missed connection that will free up some seats before the doors close.

You're right though - they know that these 4 staff need to get to the next destination, and that an entire flight is dependent on their arrival - those seats should have been pre-assigned to these staff before anyone else. That way, at least if someone gets bumped, it'll be during check in rather than when they're sitting in their seat on the plane.

Well no, they still get the original fare paid for the seat for a no show.
They overbook because they want to make money twice on those empty seats.

damn, the Asian doctor passenger got messed up. Hopefully he'll be fully compensated and treated fairly at American Airlines or something, because United sucked shit before and it isn't getting any better.

They don't have to. This happened to me. My ticket said 'see gate agent', and they kept saying that they'll get assign me a seat shortly. eventually, my wife and I were the only ones at the terminal, and they just said, sorry, we're full.

Seeing how far this apparently escalated I wouldn't be surprised if there was some other reason they wanted him off that plane. And it may be a United flight but that doesn't mean they're the only ones that can take someone off a plane.

Not to sound too tinfoil hat here, but if you're removing a person from an airplane you're going to tell the remaining passengers that the reason was something as mundane sounding as possible, you're not going to come on the PA and go "sorry about that folks, we found out the FAA screwed up and let a wanted person on our flight, but it's all fixed now"

It's nothing new, 15+ years ago my parents racked up a ton of travel credits because we volunteered to get bumped to the next flight 3 times in a row on our way back from LA.

Wouldn't you? They're a business and they have competitors, if your competitors are doing something which saves them money then you're going to do the same thing.

They don't always have the opportunity to collect twice on a "no show". There are different classes of fares that can be canceled or changed without penalty. High tier frequent fliers also have the ability to cancel or change their itinerary without penalty. Also, delayed connections would mean they don't get any revenue for that seat if left empty. They don't always get to collect twice. The only time they'd collect twice is if the fare class doesn't allow any cancellation or changes. (and in those cases, they'll usually let them rebook with a penalty)

Yes, that's generally a sign of an overbooked flight (if it doesn't already tell you during check in). Again, they're trying to wait until the last minute for someone not to show up so they can get the seat filled by the oversold customers. Again, it sucks to be the one bumped, but the airlines should do something to make it right if they're going to play the game of overbooking. Simple gestures like upgrading you to first class on the next available flight or giving travel credits goes a long way to keeping people happy.

You are right, and it brings up some interesting things to think about. My best guess is it was a computer error, or a human error.

I believe, when boarding the gate agent checks your ticket to your name, they also check the seat assignment matches your ticket. Could be the system double booked the seat, or could be as simple as the gate agent not checking properly.

Once the man was in the seat, it would make his feelings that it is "His seat" even stronger. Sounds like a fun situation to deal with.



Generally speaking, crews are always booked ahead of time on a confirmed seat. Obviously if it is a last minute change things could get double booked, but they will still be confirmed. This is dealt with before people have boarded. Whether or not you have a seat assignment on your ticket or not, you could be booted off. Getting people off an airplane once boarded is a last resort and would only happen due to some other error. Things change fast in the industry, and the people making the decisions are literally making split second decisions. It is possible there was a major change somewhere which required this crew to be on THAT plane NOW causing a last minute booking when passengers were already on board? Who know's they are all assumptions. There is a position within the airlines which literally deals with putting out fires like these all day, hopefully without starting much of another one. I don't admire those jobs.




All of this brings me back to an article I read a couple weeks ago. It was about a passenger being denied boarding due to the fact they were wearing leggings and the gate agent denied them for being inappropriately dressed. Passengers saw the conversation, recorded it then sent to the local media. It's all over the news.

Little did they know, the passenger was an employee, using standby employee passes. The companies employee pass policy clearly states its dress code, and the employee was not following it. There was nothing wrong with what the gate agent was doing.... The general public with a lack of knowledge? Better call Trudeau, because that is harassment!

Don't judge until you have all the information, the news is a joke.



Maybe I should rephrase. I'm not defending the airline in this particular instance. I do not agree with any airlines overbooking. From what I read on the article, it's much too simplistic to make any real judgement of what went wrong. I'll defend the airlines against naive opinions when someone clearly doesn't understand how an airline runs. As I said before, i'm trying to inform.

From CNN


What about the crew members?

The four crew members did indeed board the plane, and it wasn't pretty, Bridges said. Passengers berated them, told them they should be ashamed of themselves and embarrassed to work for this company.
"They just sat down quietly, it was super tense on the plane. Everyone was really unhappy after seeing this man pulled off," he said.
"I think United messed this up on the front end," Bridges added. "It shouldn't have gotten to the point where there's a man on the plane or four people on the plane that have to be removed after they've already taken their seat. If they were overbooked they should have only let people on the plane that were going to be able to leave on the plane."

Just so you know $800 is not CASH
they give out $800 United Voucher that has a time limit and you won't be able to get the remainder back if you can't use them all

Also, you need to consider the victim pulled off the plane was a physician. You might call it a stretch but what if he didn't make work and the hospital/clinic couldn't find a replacement last minute; and a patient misses a life-or-death diagnosis?

4 crew members missing a flight is not the end of the world.

I was suppose to be on that same flight next month but ended up having to cancel

United was a super pain in the ass in terms of cancelling my reservation and their CSR's were unbearable to deal with. Unfortunately almost the only way to get to Louisville from Vancouver

care to clarify?

assuming the passenger is not a threat/unruly, if one pays good money and the airfare is confirmed, you are entitled to that seat for the flight duration, no?

I don't know the legalities of it but don't understand how any airline can forcibly remove a paying customer that isn't causing a ruckus.

From CNBC:



United CEO Oscar Munoz doubled down in a letter to employees on Monday evening, claiming that employees "followed established procedures" when removing a passenger from a plane because it was overbooked, and calling the passenger "disruptive and belligerent."

United had to ask several passengers who had already boarded a flight from Chicago to Louisville on Sunday evening to leave, as the airline had sold too many tickets. One man refused to leave, and United called airport officials, who forcibly removed him from the plane.

Video circulated of the incident earlier in the day, showing the man being dragged from the plane and later returning with blood on his face. The incident drew scorn on Twitter and other social media, especially when Munoz used the euphemism "re-accomodate" in a public statement to describe the customers booted from the flight.

According to the letter, which was obtained by CNBC, when crew members first approached the passenger to tell him to leave, he "raised his voice and refused to comply," and each time they asked again "he refused and became more and more disruptive and belligerent."

Crew members "were left with no choice but to call Chicago Aviation Security Officers to assist in removing the customer from the flight," Munoz wrote, and at one point the passenger "continued to resist - running back onto the aircraft in defiance of both our crew and security officials."

Munoz acknowledged to employees that the company could learn lessons from the incident, but said: "I emphatically stand behind all of you."

Shit just keeps getting real on United.

Flight 23 on 9-11. Passenger getting dragged out of a United plane as a resulting of a overbooking.

What's next? Snakes on a United plane?? :fulloffuck:

United Airlines fucked up bad, they should have left 4 seats available if they had their standby crew coming on board. Fucking stupid

I don't think I saw this mentioned, but the 4 crew members were supposed to work a flight from Louisville the following day, not immediately following this flight working a flight from Chicago to LA as some posters stated.

In a perfect world, yes. I doubt this is taken into context on the airlines convoluted algorithm to pick a passenger. Although, with proper communications skills one could communicate to a gate service agent prior to boarding the circumstance. I bet they would work around it. If the deplaning is happening on the A/C as described, and people are getting "disruptive," the reasoning is probably not going to be as persuasive.


I don't have a reference for this, sorry. Although, the ever credible news articles are now also stating this as fact so it must be true :p


My statement about Chicago to LA was merely an example, I had not idea where the crew was going. I also stated that mrhappyslip was onboard the so called flight to LA and he wouldn't have been happy if his flight was missed. It was just for him.

Once again, without more information the crew working the next day is irrelevant. Proper rest is required, crews are not located in every city so relocation can also have it's issues.




From the article above, it seems United is taking the stance that the passenger was being difficult. This is a much easier way to reason the deplaning of the passenger. Or maybe it's a scapegoat. ha

I was just reading an industry forum and this comment made me laugh.

"I'm not saying I agree at all with what happened. The problem with cell phone justice is everything is out of context. When have you or anybody seen a passenger removed by airport police for an oversell situation . The context is all wrong.
When it gets to the point that the police tell you to come with them . You go. Not scream like a hyena and hang on to the chair."

Perhaps he was related to these two.
http://bc.ctvnews.ca/mountie-filmed-...tlam-1.3136734

Depends on which airline. Some are cash.

And according to one of the (unconfirmed) source out there, that was exactly why he didn't want to get off. He needed to be at the hospital by the next morning. Whether or not its for a life/death diagnosis, that's another story.

Not immediately following the flight, but that particular flight was already the last flight of the day. Crew members are regulated by minimum rest hours. So sending them off by train/bus/rental car is probably out of the question. Whether these crew members are scheduled to work the next day at 7am, or 5pm, that - we don't know.


But I agree, United should have accounted for these 4 crew's seat ahead of time, and the way they handled this situation is just ridiculous. Luckily, I don't travel much intra-States by air.

America is the military wing of the empire... its a super police state filled with grunts and whores... they even have to import their own doctors. Uncivilized country is uncivilized.

Trying to stay objective here:

Yes, the employees handled the situation poorly either through:

1- Poor training
2- Lack of power to offer more than a pre-determined limit (unless approved by a superior)
3- Used laws and regulations to empower themselves to boot the passenger off: explanation: I have power and law on my side, so YOU will HAVE to go, and I can make it happen by calling on the authorities: power corrupts.
4- By not negotiating with the passenger, all 100+ passengers and the crew were delayed for 2.5+ hours costing themselves much more than the vouchers.
5- Obviously, bad brand awareness for the short-run, costing UA possibly millions in lost revenues.

Yes, the passenger ALSO handled the situation poorly:

1- Do you really need to make a scene like that? It's the Youtube era, and your name and possibly your face will be on the internet forevermore.
2- If the passenger was a doctor, all the more shameful for him. A doctor would have a much clearer head and exemplified a much more controlled demeanor. If he was a doctor, and his peers recognized him, it wouldn't help with his career.
3- It's Chicago right? It is safe to assume there could be other flights to buy tickets on.
4- Admittedly, I am just using the information supplied online, but the passenger could have tried to negotiate for a better deal. I'm unsure if it was possible. On the other hand, I'm 100% sure that being dragged off the plane screaming and kicking and getting himself bloodied was not worth it.
5- His behaviour delayed the other 100+ passengers on board for 2.5+ hours.
6- If he took the vouchers, he might have boarded another flight within those 2.5+ hours on another airline.


Profit explanation of airlines:

1- Too much competition.
2- For the profitable airlines, the net profit is just $2 per passenger. So, the $300 ticket passengers paid? The airlines make $2 on average per ticket. So, if they had to use vouchers and hotel stays for booting passengers off, the entire net profit for that single flight is wiped off.
3- Not enough differentiation, so airlines focus on cost cutting and revenue maximising... .through the antics shown in the video with that passenger.
4- It's a legacy industry wherein unions and long-time employees have massive pensions to collect. This is very much disadvantageous to the longer-running, older airlines like UA, etc. and much more beneficial (in Canada) to Westjet than Air Canada.
5- Do you guys remember Canadian Airlines? And, I didn't google here... I just remembered off the top of my head, so I might not be 100% exact. It was basically a forced merger by the Canadian Government for Air Canada to take over Canadian Airlines. This meant that Air Canada had to bear the burden of the pensions of Canadian Airlines' employees. The same thing happened to UA and a few other airlines in the USA. UA actually was able to negotiate lower pensions, salaries, and labour costs, but they are still more expensive to operate than say, Jet Blue.


TL:DR: Both the employees and the passenger made extremely poor decisions. The employees abused their rights and laws to kick the passenger out. The passenger thought that by screaming and kicking, he could stay on the flight.

End result: nobody won.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/part-250

The CFR requires airlines to first ask for volunteers before denying boarding involuntarily and in this case United reportedly did offer $400 and then eventually $800 in compensation to try and get volunteers, but didn’t get enough takers. Some people think United should have offered more money, though Rule 25, section A(4)a of United’s Contract of Carriage states the airline will offer a maximum amount of $675 to $1,350, depending on the original fare and the length of the delay if it involuntarily bumps people.

Clearly a scheduling problem with unite airline. They fucked up and passenger are the one that get the short end of the sick.

Was that $800 cash or credit towards future flight?

Also if $800 cash didn't work, they should've raised it to $1,000 or even $2,000 or $3,000.

I know airlines work on small profit margins, but that's none of customers' business.

Now they are probably facing 7 digit lawsuit + lost potential income due to media exposure & ruined reputation, which could cause possible 8 or 9 digit total loss.

Airlines will always offer a travel voucher. But according to the DOT site, they are required to pay cash/check. The DOT site says the max you can get is 4x the price of your ticket, up to a max of $1350, if you are delayed from arriving at your destination by ~>4 hours. The next flight out would have been ~3pm the next day, so it probably would've qualified.

It's mind boggling that UA didn't at least try to raise their bribe to the amount they are legally required to pay out before implementing their "re-accomodation" process. You would hope someone would've taken the bribe at $1350.