Paying passenger roughed up and removed by the Police on an over sold flight

Should the pax sue I think he will go after both UAL and the CAPD in the end a settlement would probably be the end result the bigger question is how badly does this damage UAL and how will they go about repairing their image as a result of this
 
First off, Munoz is Scared-to-Death of the UAL Unions !

Now, to the passenger incident .

As Everyone has said, they should've 'Upted-the-Price", to leave.
With that said, UAL has been locked into 3rd place(behind AA and Del Duh for some time now) They'll Now sink even Lower into 3rd. place, and maybe be heading towards ' 4-TH ' !
 
Another story about a passenger volunteering to be accomadated on UA: http://www.latimes.com/business/laz...ed-low-priority-passenger-20170412-story.html

Some gems from the article:
"Fearns needed to return early so he paid about $1,000 for a full-fare, first-class ticket to Los Angeles. He boarded the aircraft at Lihue Airport on the island of Kauai, took his seat and enjoyed a complimentary glass of orange juice while awaiting takeoff. Then, as Fearns tells it, a United employee rushed onto the aircraft and informed him that he had to get off the plane."

“I asked why,” he told me. “They said the flight was overfull.”
Fearns, like the doctor at the center of that viral video from Sunday night, held his ground. He was already on the plane, already seated. He shouldn’t have to disembark. “That’s when they told me they needed the seat for somebody more important who came at the last minute,” Fearns said. “They said they have a priority list and this other person was higher on the list than me.”
“I understand you might bump people because a flight is full,” Fearns said. “But they didn’t say anything at the gate. I was already in the seat. And now they were telling me I had no choice. They said they’d put me in cuffs if they had to.”

"A United employee, responding to Fearns’ complaint that he shouldn’t have to miss the flight, compromised by downgrading him to economy class and placing him in the middle seat between a married couple who were in the midst of a nasty fight and refused to be seated next to each other."

"Fearns requested a full refund for his flight from Kauai and asked for United to make a $25,000 donation to the charity of his choice. This is how rich guys do it.

He received an email back from a United “corporate customer care specialist” apologizing that Fearns apparently had an unpleasant experience. But, no, forget about a refund.

As for that charitable donation, what are you kidding? A hard no on that.

Instead, the service rep offered to refund Fearns the difference between his first-class ticket and an economy ticket — about a week later, as if that wasn’t the first thing they should do in a situation like this — and to give him a $500 credit for a future trip on the airline.

“Despite the negative experience, we hope to have your continued support,” the rep concluded. “Your business is especially important to us and we'll do our utmost to make your future contacts with United satisfactory in every respect.”
 
As others have pointed out, I concur that this should have been settled BEFORE boarding the passengers. I just don't believe that the agents did not know until after boarding about the deadheading crew that had to be accommodated. I suspect that somewhere in this story there is a gate supervisor who ordered the agents to start boarding because the"Boarding start deadline" was now, and he/she didn't care that the deadheading issue was not settled. However, I have heard (and experienced) other tales before about such Customer Service incidents on United.

My last experience...
About 3 years ago, I was traveling on United to Costa Rica. I had to go anyway, and I had some United points (from the Continental days) that were about to expire. The total points required was about 2000 more than needed for a round-trip First Class ticket. So, I booked the flight using my points.

I was the only passenger in F/C from Houston to San Jose. F/C flight attendant was majorly annoyed that she had a passenger to see to. Cross my heart and hope to die, I had the following exchange with her...

Her: Are you going to eat? (In a sullen toned of voice.)
Me: What are my choices?
Her: Yes or No. (Yes, just like the old airline joke, but not said as a joke.)
Me: I meant what are the menu choices.
Her: Chicken or pasta.
Me: I don't suppose you could be a bit more accomodating and tell me what the dish is called and how it is prepared? Does the pasta have a tomato or cream based sauce? Is the chicken grilled? Comes with?
Her; No.

The sad part about this exchange is the fact that this was probably a former Continental flight attendant. In the 30 years I lived in Houston prior to 2001 and flew many, many miles on Continental, I had never had a reason to complain about onboard service. Evidently, the United Customer (dis)Service creed is highly infectious.

United calls/emails periodically to try to get me to up my points with them by purchasing a cruise or going on a trip. I say, "No, thank you."

P.S. I went with the pasta because the simplicity of pasta dishes is hard to mess up. It was seriously overcooked.
 
Last edited:
I hear 2 of the employees put on the flight were pilots. I wonder why 1 of them was not put in the cockpit jumpseat?


The flight was operated on an EMB 170. How many Cockpit Jumpseats? Are there any FA Jumpseats? When we had to re-route Cabin Crew the junior FA took the 4th and the Co-Pilot took the Jumpseat. Most smiled and took the seat, every now and then we had to explain in a nice way how this was effecting the Passengers, but that was the exception. On the other hand, if we asked for Volunteers and we asked for 3 and a party of 4 signed up, we took the extra volunteer and made a notation. Never took any calls from higher ups as to why we gave out more compensation than needed.
 
First off, Munoz is Scared-to-Death of the UAL Unions !

Now, to the passenger incident .

As Everyone has said, they should've 'Upted-the-Price", to leave.
With that said, UAL has been locked into 3rd place(behind AA and Del Duh for some time now) They'll Now sink even Lower into 3rd. place, and maybe be heading towards ' 4-TH ' !

According to one of my pilot friends who was part of their negotiations, you'd be wrong. He's not scared of the unions, he understands them and how to work with them. A far cry from just about any other CEO since Herb.

There's a lot more coming out about the mental stability of the customer (originating with his hometown newpaper, no less...), which sort of explains why he didn't follow law enforcement instructions...

It's ugly stuff, and would make a trial uglier.

That might also explain why United isn't above the fold on the front page at CNN or FOX right now.
 
Last edited:
The RJs rarely, if ever, have additional jumpseats. (Weight and balance, don't you know.) May be a contractual thing. At AA if we are deadheading TO an assignment, we must be provided a cabin seat. If deadheading FROM an assignment we can be required to take a jumpseat (assuming the aircraft has an empty jumpseat). Bust, as I said before, the accommodation of deadheading crew is handled BEFORE boarding.
 
The flight was operated on an EMB 170. How many Cockpit Jumpseats? Are there any FA Jumpseats? When we had to re-route Cabin Crew the junior FA took the 4th and the Co-Pilot took the Jumpseat. Most smiled and took the seat, every now and then we had to explain in a nice way how this was effecting the Passengers, but that was the exception. On the other hand, if we asked for Volunteers and we asked for 3 and a party of 4 signed up, we took the extra volunteer and made a notation. Never took any calls from higher ups as to why we gave out more compensation than needed.



I don't think that there is a FA jumpseat on the Republic 170. But don't quote me on that. But working regional flights, you see this type of situation where there are asking for volunteers, but usually this takes place BEFORE boarding. Most people will take the offer if they can be protected for the next flight or the next day. Especially if they can be at their destination by morning.

I don't know the whole story being that I don't work at ORD (where we handle Above and Below wing).
Usually if there is crew movement to protect a flight for the next day, OPS (or the carrier's crew scheduling - Republic) would let the gate know that they would have to block out the seats for the crew (2 pilots / 2 FA's). I surmise that the crew got in late, from their previous leg. Or maybe they would not make the late connection, which is why the seats were filled. Or Republic crew scheduling dropped the ball which meant they had that particular crew on. I don't know if they have a base in ORD (I know they have one in IND) so maybe they could not get a crew for the next day's flight or could not re position a crew. Lately, UA is in a completion war with DL, and we have been stressed to get closed up early and get the bird out on time. (and not re-opening up: either the main cabin door or the pits to put on late bags.) The Republic crew had to come in AFTER close-up, so that complicated matters, being it was the last flight of the day to SDF.

So the gate agents could only do one thing and solicit volunteers ONBOARD. Problem was that no one wanted to for two reasons: not enough compensation and the next flight would be in the AFTERNOON instead of morning which was on a Monday, the start of a work week. So they went to the next step which meant since there were no non-revs, they had to find out who payed the lowest fare for their ticket.

Bottom line that this is a PR nightmare of the highest proportions. I know that Oscar was trying to do right by defending the employees (Oscar has slowly tried to boost morale and make this a better place to work, and the jury is still out on this), but it only made this episode worse. Now politicians are getting involved in this. I know that lately, some cities from the Hubs have been flying Mainline instead of Regional, hopefully there will be more frequency with a mix of mainline with the 170/175.
 
There's a lot more coming out about the mental stability of the customer (originating with his hometown newpaper, no less...), which sort of explains why he didn't follow law enforcement instructions...

It's ugly stuff, and would make a trial uglier.

This background "information" on the passenger (i.e. character assassination) is not relevant to what happened.

Although I do wonder if the cops involved have a history of roughing up other senior citizens in the terminal(s) at ORD?
 
The flight was not overbooked, according to UA: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...lowed-procedures-flier-belligerent/100317166/

Instead, the gate agents pretended that the flight was overbooked and ignored the fact that the must-ride crew did not meet any of the check-in or gate presentment requirements that would create an overbooking situation.

TMZ released what it is alleging is an internal UA memo that ensures that gate agents won't be able to lie to passengers the way they did to the doc in this case:

http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdes...irlines-inflight-service-alert-doc-tmz-01.pdf

If this policy document is authentic, and it is followed, then must-ride crew will have to be booked early enough to create a real overbooking situation. This flight was not overbooked despite UA's earlier assertions to the contrary. UA had no contractual justification under its C of C for asking/forcing him to leave the aircraft and then employees lied and said that rule 21 allowed his removal because he had become disruptive/belligerent. As a common carrier, airlines do not have the unlimited discretion to de-board rule-abiding paying passengers (like this doctor).

Stupid lying bastards. UA deserves everything it gets from here on out.
 
What is sad is, no United employee was involved as far as any crew are concerned. The crew calling for the City of Chicago Aviation Security was Republic not United. As well as the 4 crew members boarding to the 4 seats (actually 5 seats) where the 4 paying passengers were seated. The 5th one ended up being Dr. Daos wife who left the plane after being told that she had to go when her hubby was assaulted and removed. Now her lies my question; Does United approach Republic and demand some reimbursement of some kind? Or does Republic automatically step up and cover 50% of it? I don't know, maybe there is something in their contract about this. The sad part is that United is taking hit for ALL of this when it should be Republic and the Chicago Aviation Police.