JPS1 However, many of them are within reasonable driving distance of a major airport. For example, Owensboro is 107 miles from Louisville. Or Johnstown, PA is 84 miles from the Pittsburgh Greater International Airport.
Which seem like ideal distances for bus service.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Back in the days of Mad Men 1960s-1980 pre deregulation flying was much more civilised and we paid for the perks.
schlimmAgree. What is surprising is there are some on here who seem to think what UAL- Republic did was justified. Fotunately most people were horrified.
Yes it was one of the worlds most stupid decisions. Even more stupid was not empowering local airline employees with the financial ability to handle the situation by raising the voucher payout limit. Unfortunately, United is still kind of militaristic in this respect....everything needs approval from the top and folks are afraid to escalate to ask. So you end up with idiotic decisions made by inexperienced low level folks with no clue. Railroads suffer from this even today and it is no wonder they picked a former railroad executive as a perfect fit to run United. Hand fits glove.
Does the airline have the power to remove passengers forcibly? Yes. Should it use it for routine or mundane purposes such as overbooking? No. Roughly akin to a Railroad Passenger Conductor setting out a noisy passenger in the middle of a desert. Can it be done? Yes. Should it be done? Probably not a good idea if you want to avoid manslaugher charges at some point.
BaltACD Oscar Munoz and his minions blew it. Forcing PAYING PASSENGERS off of a flight so the company employees can deadhead to the flights destination is wrong on too many levels to count. The flight was not overbooked, it was fully sold and only had a seat shortage when United, through the incompetence of it's crew management department felt they needed to deadhead a crew. Your ERROR does not create a EMERGENCY for ME. If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers. A former boss of my LOVED getting bumped, and drove a hard bargin for it, most of the time round trip 1st class passage to any and all destinations that the carrier had. He valued 'free' vacations more than getting home at the 'appointed' time. Each of us have our own motivations.
Oscar Munoz and his minions blew it. Forcing PAYING PASSENGERS off of a flight so the company employees can deadhead to the flights destination is wrong on too many levels to count. The flight was not overbooked, it was fully sold and only had a seat shortage when United, through the incompetence of it's crew management department felt they needed to deadhead a crew.
Your ERROR does not create a EMERGENCY for ME. If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers. A former boss of my LOVED getting bumped, and drove a hard bargin for it, most of the time round trip 1st class passage to any and all destinations that the carrier had. He valued 'free' vacations more than getting home at the 'appointed' time. Each of us have our own motivations.
so if that crew didn't get to Louisville and a flight the next morning was canceled, a Multimillion $ aircraft ideled and numerous passengers missing vital meetings, you are OK with that? (And the dreading crew at the last minute doesn't necessarily reflect on issues at UAL's crew scheduling group, but could relate to flight delays (like incoming crew having insufficient time to rest) or planned flight canceled.
You of all all people here should recognize how fluid these things are and how folks need to make split minute decisions. But all your trains ran on a strict timetable right?
schlimm CMStPnP Folks it was actually a Republic Airlines flight and because the plane had United Express paint.........it was reported as United Airlines. Still have to give TV's Cramer for the most witty anti-Munoz headline: "Coal does not complain but Passengers sure do"..........I had a good chuckle with that for a while as a former CSX stockholder. Agree. What is surprising is there are some on here who seem to think what UAL- Republic did was justified. Fotunately most people were horrified.
CMStPnP Folks it was actually a Republic Airlines flight and because the plane had United Express paint.........it was reported as United Airlines. Still have to give TV's Cramer for the most witty anti-Munoz headline: "Coal does not complain but Passengers sure do"..........I had a good chuckle with that for a while as a former CSX stockholder.
Folks it was actually a Republic Airlines flight and because the plane had United Express paint.........it was reported as United Airlines. Still have to give TV's Cramer for the most witty anti-Munoz headline: "Coal does not complain but Passengers sure do"..........I had a good chuckle with that for a while as a former CSX stockholder.
Agree. What is surprising is there are some on here who seem to think what UAL- Republic did was justified. Fotunately most people were horrified.
Yes most horrified at the actions of the Cities DOA security officers ( the fact that they were told to quit wearing "Police" jackets and continued to do so ) raises significant questions about their supervision. But there are folks here that will claim UAL held guns to their head demanding the treatment the passenger got.
Given that what is most troubling to me is the lack of understanding on members of this group how this sort of incident affects the transport network tomorrow. Hundreds delayed, lots of high value aircraft being nonproductive etc.
i could rant about a few that don't get it but it's not worth my time. But the folks that still think there is speed signaling on th UP West line will set us straight !
BuslistGiven that what is most troubling to me is the lack of understanding on members of this group how this sort of incident affects the transport network tomorrow. Hundreds delayed, lots of high value aircraft being nonproductive etc.
Oh yeah, not really. You do not board a full flight until you have the final manifest in hand. Why United has to change boarding policy is beyond me, they should have had that in their boarding policy already as a security measure.
Now if the airline screws up and that procedure is not followed. Great then the dead-heading crew flies out on the next available flight and their original flight is either cancelled or delayed. If that happens enough times the airline is not going to shrug it's shoulders.....it's going to find more competent employees instead.
Buslist BaltACD Oscar Munoz and his minions blew it. Forcing PAYING PASSENGERS off of a flight so the company employees can deadhead to the flights destination is wrong on too many levels to count. The flight was not overbooked, it was fully sold and only had a seat shortage when United, through the incompetence of it's crew management department felt they needed to deadhead a crew. Your ERROR does not create a EMERGENCY for ME. If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers. A former boss of my LOVED getting bumped, and drove a hard bargin for it, most of the time round trip 1st class passage to any and all destinations that the carrier had. He valued 'free' vacations more than getting home at the 'appointed' time. Each of us have our own motivations. so if that crew didn't get to Louisville and a flight the next morning was canceled, a Multimillion $ aircraft ideled and numerous passengers missing vital meetings, you are OK with that? (And the dreading crew at the last minute doesn't necessarily reflect on issues at UAL's crew scheduling group, but could relate to flight delays (like incoming crew having insufficient time to rest) or planned flight canceled. You of all all people here should recognize how fluid these things are and how folks need to make split minute decisions. But all your trains ran on a strict timetable right?
#1 As I understand the rules, passengers traveling together are not to be spilt up.
#2 Apparently the UAL ground person would not raise the offer (in UAL play money)above $800. Brilliant cost saving move.
#3 If you think this is the way to treat paying customers, then you had better not be in public or customer relations, or in advertising.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
I've been wondering how they decide which passenger(s) to forcibly eject if there are not enough volunteers to accept the pay-off offers. Do they put all the seat numbers in a hat and draw one out? Do they put up a list of all passengers and throw a dart at it?
Buslist so if that crew didn't get to Louisville and a flight the next morning was canceled, a Multimillion $ aircraft ideled and numerous passengers missing vital meetings, you are OK with that? (And the dreading crew at the last minute doesn't necessarily reflect on issues at UAL's crew scheduling group, but could relate to flight delays (like incoming crew having insufficient time to rest) or planned flight canceled.
You gave an excellent argument as to why there should be no caps on the compensation for denied boarding - even from the corporate profit and loss side. If the cost to the airline for the crew to miss the flight is that high, then the airline should be more than willing to pay out a good fraction of their avoided cost.
I would also wonder how much it would have cost to charter a flight to haul the crew.
I think that EGO, may have played a part in this, "We are NOT going to pay THAT MUCH, or charter someone ELSE'S plane, when we have one of our OWN going where we want to go"
In the end chartering someone else's plane certainly would have been cheaper, and I am sure that the airline was concerned that if they DID pay a ridiculous buy out price on the passengers seat, it would be reported in either the main stream, or social media, and future buy outs would go to ridiculous amounts, in an increasing spiral. It could have set a precedent for the future, that would have involved much more than this one instance, and I imagine THAT is where the concern over the cost came in, in all future episodes, not this one time incident.
It is real easy to in hindsight say they handled it HORRIBLY WRONG (Which they DID). We can certainly Hope that this Unfortunate incident will go a LOOOONG ways in preventing similar incidents in the FUTURE.
Doug
May your flanges always stay BETWEEN the rails
(from WAPO) United Airlines will no longer allow crew members to displace passengers who are already seated on a plane.
Under a new policy, which is meant to avoid future public relations disasters like the one the world witnessed earlier this week, airline crews are required to check in at least an hour before a flight leaves, the airline company said. The purpose is to avoid having to find a seat for a crew member after all passengers have already boarded.
Absolutely....The responsibility of moving the airlines crew to another location, where they are needed...should fall 100 percent on the airline...NOT it's ticketed customers. As another poster also said....Charter transportation for said crew.
Quentin
I hope we learn how much the lawyers obtain for the doctor in a settlement. I suspect that the amount will not be disclosed. Bumping is best done before boarding. And that has been said before. I still have not seen any disclosure of how the Dr. was chosen to be bumped and after he returned to his seat, what (if any) steps were taken to find alternative individuals for bumping. I note that there are some that have started trashing the Dr. for having licensing problems and orther negative comments but he is a human being and was not treated as I would expect any passenger should be treated. If you had boarded the plane, been seated and needed to get home, and was told you had to get off, I suspect you would object. And repectfully decline.Bad PR. To paraphrase a credit card commercial, "Good PR is priceless, for everything else there's Mastercard."
I have seen an inebriated individual removed from a METRA commuter train by the security officer and the conductor at night. Had some concerns about his safety but understood that local police had been called to the station to handle the person. In this case, the individual was causing a disturbance and needed to be removed. It was handled very appropriately and calmly. Crew radioed the dispatcher and arranged for the police to meet the train at the station they would arrive at. Fortunatly, no violence was involved.
schlimm (from WAPO) United Airlines will no longer allow crew members to displace passengers who are already seated on a plane. Under a new policy, which is meant to avoid future public relations disasters like the one the world witnessed earlier this week, airline crews are required to check in at least an hour before a flight leaves, the airline company said. The purpose is to avoid having to find a seat for a crew member after all passengers have already boarded.
A bit like locking the barn door after the horse has bolted, but better late than never. Sad that it takes a sordid incident like this to bring about a policy change.
Then again, prior to April 15, 1912, most steamship companys believed not having enough lifeboats for all on board wasn't much to be concerned about either.
CMStPnP You do not board a full flight until you have the final manifest in hand.
You do not board a full flight until you have the final manifest in hand.
Making stuff up again I see.
An "expensive model collector"
n012944Making stuff up again I see.
Trolling again I see.
n012944No it is not. While you don't have to volunteer your seat, the moment you are selected for to be denied boarding involuntarily, you are at the mercy of the law. Which was the case for the United passenger. It is all laid out in the contract of carriage, the fine print you get when buying the ticket. While the process of removing the passenger went horribly wrong, the passenger bears some responsiblity when he refused both the flight crew and police's demands to leave the aircraft.
Then you should have no problem posting a link to United's Contract of Carriage and pointing exactly to the provision under which this event is covered. Because United's Contract of Carriage is posted on the Internet and there are very specific examples for denial of boarding and refusing transport and dead heading crew members outside of a labor strike are not one of them.
Additionally, the flight was not overbooked or oversold, so why you posted rules from Cornell University on oversold flights probably needs an explanation as well.
Making things up again? Or Generally are you just a Corporate lapdog when it comes to treatment of airline passengers?
Seem to remember you were the guy way off base in the past on how Frequent Flyer programs work. You do realize we are in the Jet Age now and a great many policies have changed in regards to civil aviation?
<Sigh> United strikes again........
https://www.yahoo.com/style/united-airlines-kicks-couple-off-plane-en-route-wedding-181721817.html
I think when they refer to upgraded seating they are speaking about the Coach seats you pay extra for due to the location on the aircraft in the coach section or due to expanded legroom. However, if the seats are not taken it should be first come first serve, in my opinion because the airline confiiscates the expanded legroom when the overhead compartments are full and demands luggage be placed under the seat instead.........which someone needs to challenge in a civil courtroom, because thats fraud. If you buy extended legroom seats you should get the legroom under the seat in front of you as well. I shouldn't have a large portion of my extended legroom confiscated by a sky hag because other idiots on the plane do not want to check their luggage due to fees the airline charges and are attempting to skirt airline fees.
CMStPnP n012944 No it is not. While you don't have to volunteer your seat, the moment you are selected for to be denied boarding involuntarily, you are at the mercy of the law. Which was the case for the United passenger. It is all laid out in the contract of carriage, the fine print you get when buying the ticket. While the process of removing the passenger went horribly wrong, the passenger bears some responsiblity when he refused both the flight crew and police's demands to leave the aircraft. Then you should have no problem posting a link to United's Contract of Carriage and pointing exactly to the provision under which this event is covered. Because United's Contract of Carriage is posted on the Internet and there are very specific examples for denial of boarding and refusing transport and dead heading crew members outside of a labor strike are not one of them. Additionally, the flight was not overbooked or oversold, so why you posted rules from Cornell University on oversold flights probably needs an explanation as well. Making things up again? Or Generally are you just a Corporate lapdog when it comes to treatment of airline passengers? Seem to remember you were the guy way off base in the past on how Frequent Flyer programs work. You do realize we are in the Jet Age now and a great many policies have changed in regards to civil aviation?
n012944 No it is not. While you don't have to volunteer your seat, the moment you are selected for to be denied boarding involuntarily, you are at the mercy of the law. Which was the case for the United passenger. It is all laid out in the contract of carriage, the fine print you get when buying the ticket. While the process of removing the passenger went horribly wrong, the passenger bears some responsiblity when he refused both the flight crew and police's demands to leave the aircraft.
Fortunately, United has changed that policy, or so they claim. United's current Contract of Carriage found online and dated Feb. 17, 2017, does not allow removal of a seated passenger with a valid ticket for deadheading employees under any circumstances. So UAL may have been in violation of their own policy. Perhaps their personnnel are as out-of_ date as many of their aircraft?
schlimmFortunately, United has changed that policy, or so they claim.
I don't think they changed the Contract of Carriage I think they changed the boarding procedure. Contract of Carriage I suspect is boilerplate between airlines but i would have to check.
American changed their boarding procedure a while back. I remember when they used to board everyone on the plane then attempt to fill the remaining seats with standby's it always resulted in mistakes being made and arguments on the plane and was a pretty dumb method.
Well they stopped that at least on the KC to Dallas and return flights which are normally every seat taken (MD-80 or 737 flight). They don't board First Class until every seat is taken and they preannounce before boarding that First Class is full. They do the same with coach before they board coach and preannounce that coach is full and they even will not let groups 6 or 7 and beyond board with rollaboards anymore.......they are forced to gate check them (for free....which still rewards the idiots for trying to cheat the fee system).
Used to be Groups 1-5 on American now I think they expanded it to 1-8 or 9. No longer do they call out Frequent Flyer program status, every status has a group number. However they still advertise they will bump others from the flight if your a Platinum FF member and need to be on the flight BUT....they only do that if you check in well in advance of the flight........they won't do it at the very last minute.
I asked American why they changed their boarding procedure earlier this year (I think it was March) and they stated some of their passengers were getting confused on what status they had on the FF program........which is a diplomatic way of saying they were skipping line and American didn't want to send them to the back of the line. I think American is more strict with the new system and if you try to skip line they ask you to wait now.
CMStPnP n012944 Making stuff up again I see. Trolling again I see.
n012944 Making stuff up again I see.
Pointing out your mistruths is not trolling. It might even be considered a full time job....
Paul of Covington I've been wondering how they decide which passenger(s) to forcibly eject if there are not enough volunteers to accept the pay-off offers. Do they put all the seat numbers in a hat and draw one out? Do they put up a list of all passengers and throw a dart at it?
"The priority of all other confirmed passengers may be determined based on a passenger’s fare class, itinerary, status of frequent flyer program membership, and the time in which the passenger presents him/herself for check-in without advanced seat assignment.”
CMStPnP Additionally, the flight was not overbooked or oversold, so why you posted rules from Cornell University on oversold flights probably needs an explanation as welll
Additionally, the flight was not overbooked or oversold, so why you posted rules from Cornell University on oversold flights probably needs an explanation as welll
That being said, I should know better to discuss anything with you. You are always right, regardless of the facts, so I bow out.
This entire affair is a object lesson in - "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should." On many, many levels.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD This entire affair is a object lesson in - "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should." On many, many levels.
n012944It was oversold. The moment the flight crew was assigned positive space on the flight, there were 4 less seats on the flight. If the flight was full, it was now oversold by 4. The 4 crewmembers not only held "confirmed reserve space" but they had the highest confirmed status as "must ride" confirmed passengers critical to airline operations. As such they would be the LAST passengers to be taken off the aircraft. All of this is perfectly legal and consistent with aviation laws and regulations. The time of their booking is moot. That being said, I should know better to discuss anything with you. You are always right, regardless of the facts, so I bow out.
Again red-lining the BS meter...
Oversold condition is also defined on the internet and is in contradiction to your definition above. Oversold is when more passengers hold confirmed reservations than seats available. If stand-by passengers were seated before the flight crew check-in (which happened if the flight was NOT overbooked as media reports), then the flight was not oversold nor was it overbooked.
It's very clear either the gate check in screwed up or they made the determination the flight crew would not arrive in time and gave away their seats............then tried to fix their mistake with vouchers. You can't seat a stand-by passenger over a confirmed reservation without no-showing the reservation on the system (thereby canceling the previous seat reservation).
Everytime you argue with me you always argue a total BS position so it's not hard to win an argument........a lot of your information is also quite dated I will say.
Hey Milwaujkee Road, of course you are right and have the facts at hand.
But still, isn't your last paragraph totally unnecessary, and cannot we simply present facts without labeling people? Keep the thread as polite as possible?
daveklepper Hey Milwaujkee Road, of course you are right and have the facts at hand. But still, isn't your last paragraph totally unnecessary, and cannot we simply present facts without labeling people? Keep the thread as polite as possible?
Johnny
Firelock76 schlimm (from WAPO) United Airlines will no longer allow crew members to displace passengers who are already seated on a plane. Under a new policy, which is meant to avoid future public relations disasters like the one the world witnessed earlier this week, airline crews are required to check in at least an hour before a flight leaves, the airline company said. The purpose is to avoid having to find a seat for a crew member after all passengers have already boarded. A bit like locking the barn door after the horse has bolted, but better late than never. Sad that it takes a sordid incident like this to bring about a policy change. Then again, prior to April 15, 1912, most steamship companys believed not having enough lifeboats for all on board wasn't much to be concerned about either.
At least in 1912, new regulations were created to stop future disasters. Nothing will change to protect passengers in this case.
Nevermind...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.